by Pascale Rizk
[embedded content]
Chunchon (Agenzia Fides) – For more than 50 years, the Sisters of Our Lady of the Good Shepherd in Chuncheon, Seoul, and Jeju, South Korea, have prayed and worked for women and girls in difficulty: single mothers, immigrants, pregnant women, and girls abused within the family. In recent months, they inaugurated a new facility for women in need at their provincial house of the International Congregation of Religious in Chuncheon.Founded in 1995 with the help of donations, the sisters’ house in Chuncheon continues to grow today with the support of old and new benefactors who value the sisters’ work on behalf of women and girls from all over the country.At the inauguration ceremony last April, Bishop Simon Kim Ju-young of Chuncheon addressed the benefactors, saying: “You must be the happiest of all. You should know that while we priests sometimes neglect prayer, the nuns, on the contrary, always pray diligently.” It was he himself who, a year earlier, had invited the parishes of the diocese to support the fundraising campaign launched by the sisters. “Since 1993,” reports Sister Marie Jean Bae, who served as Provincial Superior from 2014 to 2019, “the sisters of Chuncheon had used the land on which the new building stands free of charge. Then, in 2022, the owner put the land up for sale. If it had been sold and another building had been built on the site, the nuns would have had to abandon their project.” “We and the sisters of the contemplative branch prayed together out of desperation. The merciful God heard our prayers, and just two days after we intensified our prayers, the owner of the land changed his mind and decided to donate it to the convent, apologizing for not having done so sooner,” the nun continued. “What is even more surprising is that he also thanked us for accepting the donation,” summarizes Sister Marie Jean, who has since become the South Korean coordinator of “Talita khum,” the international network of consecrated women against human trafficking.This year, the Congregation celebrates the bicentenary of its contemplative branch, whose history dates back to the works and spiritual insights of Saint John Eudes (1601-1680) in the 17th century, when prostitution was a social scourge punishable by imprisonment. Faced with the misery and injustice that prevailed during a time of spiritual and moral decline, Eudes was urged by the young Madeleine Lamy in Caen, Normandy, to found the first house of refuge, a true “hospital for these souls.” From papal approval until the revolution of 1789, 150 years passed, during which the religious were dispersed and their houses closed. It was not until 1825 that the houses were reopened thanks to the courage of a young superior, Maria Eufrasia, the foundress of the Sisters of St. Magdalene, now the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd.Religious Sisters at the Side of Women in needBetween the 1960s and 1970s—immediately after the Second Vatican Council—changes in the lives of the sisters in Korea also began to emerge. In 1966, at the invitation of Bishop Peter Han Kong-ryel of the Diocese of Gwangju, four American nuns came to Korea to establish the spirituality of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd. Han was shocked by the sexual exploitation of young girls and women by the US military in his diocese and, in the charism of their foundress, Saint Mary Eufrasia, asked the sisters to help these victims of oppression. Thus, in 1968, the sisters established a dormitory and vocational school near the US Air Force base in Gunsan. This facility remained in operation until 1976. Inspired by the motto “One life is more precious than the whole world,” their commitment to supporting single pregnant women clearly demonstrated how important it was for the Catholic Church to create appropriate facilities for these women. Thus, at the invitation of Bishop Park Thomas Stewart, the sisters began with a small house in Seoul and opened “Mary’s Home” for single mothers in Chuncheon Province in 1979, before moving to the current provincial house complex and the counseling and support centers for women in 1985. With the entry into force in South Korea of the law against prostitution in 2004 and the significant increase in international marriages – mainly due to the establishment of diplomatic relations with China in 1992 – forms of support for women in distress have been strengthened to meet the urgent need for counselling for women who are victims of domestic violence and to improve communication between spouses of different nationalities, which is often hampered by language and cultural barriers.Healing wounds of body and soulIncreased awareness of justice and the denunciation of abuse against women led to the adoption of the “Basic Law for the Development of Women” (여성발전기본법) in South Korea in 1995. In centers for pregnant women such as “Mary’s Home,” women are prepared for a safe birth and can then decide whether to keep their child or place it in foster care. The work of the sisters is crucial in this area, as they advocate for anti-abortion policies in favor of the dignity of life. By welcoming women into these homes, they also aim to protect them from social prejudice. Mothers who have been victims of various forms of violence can also come from outside to seek refuge in the facilities run by the sisters, for example, at the “House of Friends” in Seoul or at another women’s shelter in Jeju. Support can be short-term (six months) – renewable – or long-term (two years). To facilitate their return to normalcy, programs are developed to help them heal their emotional and physical wounds. The women are guided through their personal and professional development and receive support in the form of free room and lodging, medical care, vocational training to achieve economic independence, and preparation for the GED, an exam equivalent to a high school diploma. The center in Chuncheon, which is operated in cooperation with Caritas, offers special legal support and advice, for example, in filing lawsuits against the perpetrator or drafting a statement in civil proceedings. The sisters also run homes for girls who have been victims of domestic violence and family problems. In these facilities, such as the “House of the Good Shepherd”, they receive support from their families. At organizations such as the “Good Shepherd House” in Seoul, efforts are being made to give young girls back the warmth of family, the feeling of love and acceptance in a safe and comfortable place, where they are given a sense of normality. “There is no greater pain than being abused at home by one’s parents. It is a long road to achieve healthy independence and psycho-emotional recovery, but they do it,” says Mariana Inea Young, a ‘Sand Play’ therapist and social worker. “So many come back to share their stories of recovery,” adds Sister Damiana Ham.A hotline for women in needEvery Thursday, Sister Rufina Hwa Jung Shim—66 years old and now retired after seven years as head of the “hotline” in Jeju—went to the neighborhoods to help women on the streets. Her zeal, the fourth vow of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, allows her to transcend the boundaries of space and time to continue her mission. “We begin every morning with a Bible reading, and even though the staff includes women from all Korean denominations, the Gospel remains the heart of the mission.”At the “1366 Center,” the sisters are commissioned by the diocese to manage the “Catholic Women’s Line” telephone counseling service, established in 1998 by the Ministry of Health and Welfare. Depending on the case, women are supported locally or placed in women’s shelters and connected with the police, hospitals, or other facilities established for their protection. In recent years, increased awareness of women’s issues in South Korea has led to a substantial change in government-sponsored social welfare services. Social service agencies working in the field are consulted by the government before defining the most appropriate policies. Appropriate professional qualifications are also required.Meanwhile, on July 1, the Ministry of Equal Opportunities and Family Affairs passed a law implementing the “Advance Family Allowance System.” The system provides for the advance payment of family allowances and contributions even if one parent (usually the father) evades their child support obligations. The unpaid contributions of the insolvent parent remain with the parent as a debt to public institutions, which must be settled by paying contributions to the social security institutions. The law provides for monthly maintenance of 200,000 KRW (equivalent to 125 euros) for each child until they reach adulthood. This is a form of support that also alleviates the economic difficulties of single mothers and women abandoned by their spouses. (Agenzia Fides, 3/7/2025)Share:
This popular online training event is scheduled for Thursday 23 October 2025 and is ideal for anyone involved in veterinary dispensary roles.
Who is this for
This event is ideal for Veterinary Surgeons, Veterinary Nurses, SQPs, Veterinary Pharmacists, Veterinary Practice Managers and anyone involved in a veterinary dispensary role.
Whether you’re looking to refresh your knowledge or are new to this area, this course will provide critical insights into the safe and compliant handling of veterinary medicines.
Course content
Delivered by the VMD Inspection Team, this course provides an in-depth guide to the principles and protocols essential for the responsible management of veterinary medicines and the veterinary dispensary. The content covered will include; prescribing, supplying, dispensing, sourcing and storing, processes to minimise dispensing errors and updates on amendments to the Veterinary Medicines Regulations (VMR).
The day will provide you with the tools and knowledge needed to effectively manage veterinary medicines within the legislative requirements. This will be delivered through an interactive online session, including talks and practical examples, to provide real-life applications of the learning received. Included will be:
Amendments to the Veterinary Medicines Regulations: What You Need to Know
Sourcing Veterinary Medicines
Correct Storage
Temperature Monitoring and recording
Prescribing, Supplying, Dispensing, and Labelling
Managing Controlled Drugs: Storage and Record-Keeping
Reducing Dispensing Errors
Common Deficiencies noted in VMD Inspections
Networking opportunities will be available throughout the day, along with dedicated time to ask VMD Inspectors individual questions.
Real-life scenarios and examples will highlight common pitfalls and how to avoid them, with opportunities for attendees to reflect on and apply insights to their own practice.
Course duration
The event will run from 9 am to 4 pm.
Course outcome
On completion of the course, attendees will be equipped to confidently manage veterinary medicines, ensure proper storage, and dispense with greater assurance. They will be able to fulfil their responsibilities with due regard for both clients and animals, secure in the knowledge that all legislative requirements are met.
The VMD is committed to providing accessible and supportive training to industry. Delegate feedback from previous training events include:
“For an online course, it was clear and concise. I liked the use of the polls and interactions”
“Friendly, clear instructions and knowledgeable”
“I enjoyed the real-world insights—because knowing the rules is one thing, but understanding how they play out in inspections and day-to-day operations is what really matters”
VMD’s Training Centre Coordinator, Ali Pitfield, said:
“Our training events offer a unique opportunity for industry professionals and those in the veterinary sector to engage directly with our experts, and receive immediate answers to their questions. It’s fantastic to hear the training is valued by attendees”.
Registration
If you are interested in attending the event, please visit Eventbrite for further information and to book your place.
Course cost
This course costs £495
Special offer! For the first 20 tickets sold we will be offering a £100 discount, making the course cost £395 per person.
Disclaimer: Once the first 20 tickets are sold the price will then remain at £495 per person.
All attendees will receive a certificate of attendance.
Enquiries
If you have any questions, training enquiries or would like to contact the VMD Training Team, please email training@vmd.gov.uk.
Fit for the Future: Health and Social Care Secretary’s statement
Wes Streeting, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, made an oral statement announcing Fit for the Future: 10 Year Health Plan for England.
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
With your permission, I will make a statement to the House on ‘Fit for the Future’ – the Government’s 10 Year Health Plan for England.
There are moments in our national story when our choices define who we are.
In 1948, the Attlee Government made a choice founded on fairness: that everyone in our country deserves to receive the care you need, not just the care you can afford.
It enshrined in law and in the service itself, our collective conviction that healthcare is not a privilege to be bought and sold, but a right to be cherished and protected.
And now it falls to our generation to make the same choice: to rebuild our National Health Service, and protect in this century what Attlee’s government built for the last.
That is the driving mission of our Ten-Year Plan.
In September, Lord Darzi provided the diagnosis: The NHS was broken [political content redacted].
In the past year, Labour has put the NHS on the road to recovery.
We promised 2 million extra appointments, and we’ve delivered more than 4 million.
We promised 1,000 new GPs on the frontline. We’ve recruited 1,900.
We’ve taken almost a quarter of a million off waiting lists, cutting waiting lists to their lowest level in two years.
And we have launched an independent commission, chaired by Baroness Casey, to build a national consensus around a new national care service to meet the needs of older and disabled people into the 21st century.
Today, the Prime Minister has set out our prescription to get the NHS back on its feet and make it fit for the future.
Our Plan will deliver three big shifts:
First, from hospital to community.
We will turn our National Health Service into a Neighbourhood Health Service. The principle is simple: Care should happen as locally as it can: digitally by default, in a patient’s home if possible, in a neighbourhood health centre when needed, in a hospital if necessary.
We’ll put Neighbourhood Health Centres in every community, so you can see a GP, nurse, physio, care worker, therapist, get a test, scan, or treatment for minor injuries, all under one roof. The NHS will be organised around patients, rather than patients having to organise their lives around the NHS.
It will be easier and faster to see a GP. We will train thousands more, end the 8am scramble, provide same-day consultations, and bring back the family doctor.
If you are someone with multiple conditions and complex needs, the NHS will co-create a personal care plan, so your care is done with you, not to you.
Pharmacy will play an expanded role in the Neighbourhood Health Service. They will manage long-term conditions; treat conditions like obesity and high blood pressure; screen for disease and vaccinate against it.
And we will reform the dental contract, to get more dentists doing NHS work, rebuilding NHS dentistry.
Over the course of this Plan, the majority of the 135 million outpatient appointments done each year will be moved out of hospitals. The funding will follow, so a greater share of NHS investment is spent in primary and community care.
Second, from analogue to digital.
No longer will NHS staff have to enter seven passwords to login to their computers, or spend hours writing notes and entering data. Our Plan will liberate frontline staff from the parts of the job they hate, so they can focus on the job they love – caring for patients.
For the first time ever, patients will be given real control over a single, secure and authoritative account of their data. The single patient record will mean NHS staff can see your medical records and know your medical history, so they can provide you with the best possible care.
Wearable technology will feed in real-time health data, so patients’ health can be monitored while they stay in the comfort of their own home, with clinicians reaching out at the first signs of deterioration.
The NHS App will become the front door to the health service, delivering power to the patient. You will be able to:
Book and rearrange appointments for you, your children, or a loved one you care for
Get instant advice from an AI doctor in your pocket
Leave feedback on your care, and see what feedback other patients have left
Choose where you’re treated
Book appointments in urgent care, so you don’t wait for hours
And refer yourself to a specialist where clinically appropriate
And of course, patients can already do these things, but only if they can afford private healthcare. With Labour’s plan, every patient will receive a first-class service, whatever their background and whatever they earn.
Third, from sickness to prevention.
Working with the food industry, we will make the healthy choice the easy choice to cut calories.
We will rollout obesity jabs on the NHS.
We’ll get Britain moving, with our new NHS Points scheme.
We’ll update school food standards so kids are fed healthy, nutritious meals.
And we will tackle the mental health crisis, with support in every school to catch problems early, 24/7 support with virtual therapists for moderate need, and dedicated emergency departments for patients for when they reach crisis point
Madam Deputy Speaker, the science is on our side. The revolution in artificial intelligence, machine learning and big data offers a golden opportunity to deliver better care at better value.
New innovator passports and reform of NICE and the MHRA will see medicines and technology rapidly adopted.
Robotic surgery will become the norm in certain procedures, so patients recover from surgery at home rather than in hospital beds.
And the NHS will usher in a new age of medicine, leapfrogging disease so we are predicting and preventing it, rather than just diagnosing and treating. It is therefore the ambition of this plan to provide a genomic test for every newborn baby by 2035.
Thanks to my Right Honourable Friend, the Chancellor, this plan is backed by an extra £29 billion a year by the end of the Spending Review period, and the biggest capital investment in the history of the NHS.
Of course, alongside that investment, comes reform. This plan slashes unnecessary bureaucracy, and devolves power and resource to the frontline.
It abolishes more than 200 bodies, because listening to patients, guaranteeing safety, and protecting whistleblowers is core business for the NHS, and should never have been outsourced.
It commits to publishing league tables to rank providers.
We will intervene in failing providers to turn them around, and reinvent the foundation trust model in a new system of earned autonomy.
Pay will be tied to performance, so excellence is recognised, and failure has consequences.
Tariffs will be reduced to boost productivity.
Block contracts will end, with funding tied to outcomes.
The plan gives power to the patient, so hospitals are financially rewarded for a better service.
It closes health inequalities by investing more in working class communities.
And it establishes a National Investigation into maternity and neonatal services – to deliver the truth, justice, and improvement that bereaved families deserve.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sometimes told that NHS staff are resistant to change. On the contrary, they’re crying out for it. They suffer the moral injury of seeing their patients treated in unfit conditions. And they’re the ones driving innovation on the frontline, and so their fingerprints are all over this Plan.
The public are desperate for change, too. Each of us has our own story about the NHS and the difference it has made to our own lives. And we also know the consequences of failure. That is why we cannot afford to fail.
To succeed, we need to defeat the cynicism that says that says ‘nothing ever changes’.
We know the change in our Plan is possible because it’s already happening. We have toured the length and breadth of the country and scouted the world for the best examples of reform. If Australia can effectively serve communities living in the outback, we can surely meet the needs of rural England. If community health teams can go door to door to prevent illness in Brazil, we can certainly do the same in Bradford.
We know we can build the Neighbourhood Health Service, because teams in Cornwall, Camden, Northumbria, and Stratford – where I was with the Prime Minister and Chancellor this morning – are already showing us how to do it.
So, we will take the best of the NHS to the rest of the NHS. And we will apply the best examples of innovation from around the world, to benefit people here at home.
Above all else, we will give power to the patient. This Plan fulfils Nye Bevan’s commitment in 1948 to put a megaphone to the mouth of every patient. And it will restore the founding promise of the NHS, to be there for us when we need it.
[Political content redacted]
It falls to us to make sure that the NHS not only survives, but thrives. And we will not let our country down.
And of course, if we succeed, we will be able to say with pride that will echo down the decades of the 21st century, that we were the generation that built an NHS fit for the future and a fairer Britain, where everyone lives well for longer.
UConn is deepening its commitment to a sustainable future through a student-focused innovation challenge designed to reduce carbon emissions and promote clean energy solutions. In partnership with Eversource Energy, UConn has launched its third annual summer competition aimed at engaging students in the design of the future energy landscape.
The competition has attracted an impressive group of participants, with five finalist teams comprising 11 students – five undergraduates and six graduates. These talented individuals represent eight diverse departments and schools: the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and School of Computing in the College of Engineering; the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics in the College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources (CAHNR); the School of Business; and the Department of Chemistry and the Department of Mathematics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.
This multidisciplinary representation brings together diverse perspectives and technical expertise to address the complex challenges of decarbonization and the energy transition across UConn campuses and Connecticut municipalities.
Each team will receive summer funding and be paired with mentors from UConn faculty and Eversource Energy. The mentorship will support students in refining their proposals and addressing the practical dimensions of their clean energy solutions. This hands-on guidance is designed to help participants explore real-world applications of their research and ideas.
The culmination of the teams’ work will be presented at the 2025 Sustainable Clean Energy Summit on Monday, Oct. 27, 2025. The event will take place alongside the 2025 North American Power Symposium, offering students a valuable platform to present their innovations to an audience of industry professionals, researchers, utility leaders and state officials.
Following the Summit, the winning team will receive additional funding to continue their work throughout the academic year. This extended support aims to help transform early-stage ideas into actionable and impactful clean energy solutions.
The continued collaboration between UConn and Eversource Energy underscores a shared commitment to environmental responsibility, climate resilience, and technological advancement. Through this initiative, students are empowered to take an active role in building a cleaner and more sustainable energy future.
The projects and student teams selected for the 2025 Clean Energy & Sustainability Innovation Program are:
Project 1:Fuel Cell as a Catalyst for Local Economic and Environmental Development
Students: Songyang Zhou (Master’s Student, Data Science), Jane Torrence ’27 (BUS)
Project 2:UConn’s Wastewater to Bioenergy: Integrated Chlorella Cultivation and Pyrolysis
Students: Azeem Sarwar (Ph.D. Student, Chemical Engineering), Maham Liaqat (Ph.D. Candidate, Chemistry), Muhammad Hassan (Ph.D. Student, Chemical Engineering).
Project 3:Dual Characterization of Innovative Hydropower Systems for Sustainable Energy Storage and Generation
Students: Jonathan Hylton ’26 (ENG), Safiya Crockett ’26 (CAHNR).
Project 4:Harnessing Tidal Energy for Shoreside Electrification: A Tool for Sustainable Power in Coastal Connecticut Marine Terminals
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Scientists comment on the Government’s 10 Year Health Plan.
Prof Siddharthan Chandran, Director the UK Dementia Research Institute, said:
“This bold and visionary 10-year plan that embraces the digital-data revolution will position the UK to lead again in health innovation.
“We particularly welcome the move toward a neighbourhood health service. We know from our research and our community of people with lived experience of dementia that this is what they wish to see. At the UK Dementia Research Institute, our researchers are working with the NHS to integrate ‘at home’ pioneering digital and AI tools and technology to allow people with dementia to live safely, well and in their own homes for longer with reduced need for hospitalisation.
“As the UK’s national research institute for dementia and related neurodegenerative conditions, we are leading transformative research that will lay the ground for individualised prediction, prevention and brain protection to ensure healthy brain ageing for all.”
Professor Steve Turner, RCPCH President, said:
“The 10-Year Health Plan makes a bold and welcome commitment to transforming the NHS into a more accessible, community-focused service, and offers a vital opportunity to reimagine how we deliver care to children and families. I’m really pleased to see the Plan emphasise prevention, early intervention, and integrated care. Embedding paediatric expertise within neighbourhood health teams, alongside mental health professionals, health visitors, and community workers, could be transformative for children – especially those with complex or long-term conditions.
“Fundamentally, the success of this plan will also depend on sustained investment in the paediatric workforce. Children’s needs are unique, and these new models of care must be underpinned by adequate staffing, training, and support for professionals working in community settings, alongside equitable funding between children’s and adult’s services.
“We must jointly seize the opportunity to transform child health, and as such RCPCH now look forward to working closely with government and NHS leaders to deliver a robust implementation plan for child health and realise the government’s ambition to raise the healthiest generation of children ever.”
The nature of this story means everyone quoted above could be perceived to have a stake in it. As such, our policy is not to ask for interests to be declared – instead, they are implicit in each person’s affiliation.
Managing healthcare easy as online banking with revamped NHS App
NHS App to become complete digital front door to NHS, where patients book appointments, manage medicines, and view data
PM sets out how 10 Year Health Plan will bring NHS into 21st century to meet the needs of patients around the country
Patients to make self-referrals via App, connect with a clinician, link-up wearable tech, and gain free access to health apps
Plan for Change will rebuild NHS and see ground-breaking Single Patient Record finally in one place – viewable on App from 2028
Patients will be able to access a range of healthcare services and advice at the touch of a button, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has set out today, as the Government’s Plan for Change drives forward fundamental reform to the NHS to make it easier and fairer for everyone to access the care they need.
Launching the 10 Year Health Plan today – the government’s roadmap to rebuilding the health service to make it fit for the future – the PM set out how the App will act as a digital front door to the health service, overhauling how people get advice, manage appointments and interact with services to make their healthcare more convenient and more personalised.
For the first time, patients will be able to book, move and cancel all their appointments on the App – ending the 8am scramble for a GP – and the App will use artificial intelligence to provide instant advice for patients who need non-urgent care, available 24/7.
Through the plan, which has been published in Parliament today, patients will have quicker, better access to the right care. They will be able to self-refer on the App to mental health talking therapies, musculoskeletal services, podiatry, and audiology – freeing up GPs and new Neighbourhood Health Services to focus on providing direct care while dramatically slashing waiting lists for these services – delivering on the government’s Plan for Change promise to cut waiting lists.
Accessing healthcare will be quicker than ever thanks to expanded features on the app. People will be able to manage their medicines and book vaccines from their phone, connect with a clinician for a remote consultation, and even leave a question for a specialist to answer without making an appointment. Patients simply being able to book an appointment digitally rather than today’s convoluted process will save the NHS £200 million over 3 years.
For parents, the new App will deliver a 21st century alternative to the ‘red book’, ensuring that their children’s medical records are available to them in their pocket, so they do not have to carry their red books to every appointment. It will also provide advice and support throughout childhood, offering guidance on weaning and healthy habits. Over time, it will record feeding times, monitor sleep, and use AI analytics to understand the best way to care for children when they are unwell.
The changes will build on the progress Government has already made to increase the number of hospitals allowing patients to view appointment information on the app. Almost 12 million fewer paper letters have been sent by hospitals since July 2024. Forecasts for this year show the use of in-app notifications for planned care will prevent the need for 15.7 million SMS messages.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:
For far too long, the NHS has been stuck in the past, reliant on letters, lengthy phone queues and even fax machines.
But that doesn’t match the reality of our daily lives, where everything from shopping and banking to entertainment and travel can be sorted with the touch of a button from our phones.
To rebuild our NHS, we have to make sure it reflects the society it serves. That’s why our 10 Year Health Plan will bring it into the digital age by opening up fairer and more convenient access to healthcare. Through our new App – a digital front door for your care – parents will be able to keep track of their children’s health through an online ‘red book’ fit for the 21st century, and we will put a stop to patients having to endlessly repeat their medical history thanks to a single patient record.
Our Plan for Change promised to make our NHS fit for the future and that’s what we are getting on with delivering – fixing the foundations of our health service and making sure it will be there to look after us for decades to come.
This is one major arm of the technological innovation at the heart of the 10 Year Health Plan launched today, which also includes introducing the single patient record, rolling out AI scribes to take notes for clinicians, using Generative AI to create the first draft of care plans, and introducing single sign-on for NHS software.
The government’s 10 Year Health Plan sets out the fundamental reforms we will deliver to address the challenges facing the health service in the face of inherited underinvestment and neglect and the evolving needs of a modern society.
Speaking at the launch of the plan today, the PM set out how the plan will deliver three key shifts to make the NHS fit for the future: hospital to community; analogue to digital; and sickness to prevention. Through fundamental reforms to rewire the NHS around these shifts, the plan will deliver the government’s pledge to cut waiting lists, improve healthcare for everyone wherever they live, and ensure the NHS is equipped to look after us for decades to come.
This historic transformation will fundamentally change the future of healthcare, and it will be underpinned by a new Single Patient Record. This will finally bring together all of a patient’s medical records into one place, so patients do not have to repeat their medical history to each clinician they see. The Single Patient Record will make sure patients get seamless care no matter who they are being treated by in the NHS.
Two-thirds of outpatient appointments – which currently cost in total £14 billion a year – will be replaced by automated information, digital advice, direct input from specialists and patient-initiated follow ups via the NHS App.
Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting said:
The NHS App will become a doctor in your pocket, bringing our health service into the 21st century.
Patients who can afford to pay for private healthcare can get instant advice, remote consultations with a doctor, and choose where and when their appointments will be. Our reforms will bring those services to every patient, regardless of their ability to pay.
The 10 Year Health Plan will keep every patient fully informed of their healthcare and make using the NHS as easy and convenient as doing your banking or shopping online. It will deliver a fundamental shift in the way people access their care – from analogue to digital.
A new Single Patient Record will bring an end to the frustration of repeating your medical history to different doctors. Instead, health and care professionals will have your record in one, handy place, so they can give you the best possible care.
Through our Plan for Change, this Government is shifting care to digital and delivering an NHS which is truly fit for the future.
The Government will make the Single Patient Record possible through new legislation that places a duty on every health and care provider to make the information they record about a patient, available in the Single Patient Record.
We will also legislate to give patients access to their record by default. From 2028, patients will be able to view it, securely, on the NHS App. Over time, that data will include not only medical records, but a personalised account of health risk, drawing from lifestyle, demographic and genomic data – helping catch problems early before they develop, and prevent people from poor health.
The Single Patient Record is designed as National Critical Infrastructure. This means it will be built and maintained to meet the highest levels of security, equivalent to those used for the UK’s most vital systems, such as energy and transport networks. Health and care professionals treating and caring for a patient will have secure access to their record; patients can control who else they share it with and will have a robust audit trail of who has accessed their record.
Sir Jim Mackey, Chief Executive at NHS England, said:
The NHS App will be at the heart of the tech transformation we’re planning for the NHS to give people much more ownership of their healthcare – all from wherever they are at the tap of a screen.
Millions of us already have the app downloaded on our phones and the improvements we’re introducing as part of the 10 Year Health Plan, from booking appointments and speaking to clinicians online to seeing all your medical records in one place, will make the NHS App the digital front door to the NHS.
A My Health tool will include real-time data from wearables, biometric sensors, or smart devices and will connect to relevant NHS data too – whether that is the results of recent tests at home or in a neighbourhood health centre. Wearables will be able to feed vital data into the App such as step count, heart rate and sleep quality, to provide tailored, personal health advice. The single patient record will have robust security controls.
And a new My NHS GP tool will harness AI to direct people to the most appropriate and timely care they need. In some cases, it will advise on self-care – and help direct patients to well-evidenced consumer healthcare products. In others, it might direct to a community pharmacy, a neighbourhood health centre or to emergency care.
Over the course of the plan, the features set to be developed through the NHS App will include the ability to:
My NHS GP – book a remote or face-to-face appointment, and receive personalised health advice using new AI tool
My Specialist – self-refer when clinically appropriate and leave a question for a specialist to answer
My Consult – connect with a clinician for a remote consultation
My Medicines – manage repeat prescriptions for delivery/collection and receive reminders
My Care – book and manage appointments, enrol in a clinical trial and access Single Patient Record
My Companion – get information about a health condition or procedure, and ask AI or a clinician a question
My Choices – find nearest pharmacy, the best providers, and leave feedback on services
My Vaccines – see when vaccines are up-to-date and book appointments to get them organised, and find travel vaccine info
My Health – bring data like blood pressure, heart rate, glucose levels together, and include real-time date from wearables or smart devices
My Children – a digitised red book, where parents can get advice and support for parents throughout childhood
My Carer – securely prove you are a carer, book appointments and talk to your loved one’s care team
Caroline Abrahams, Charity Director at Age UK said:
It’s clear that technology is set to transform many aspects of our lives for the better over the next decade, including the delivery of healthcare and how we interact with the NHS.
The potential of the NHS App for example, is truly exciting, but we must also ensure that no one is left behind, including the many millions of older people who are not online and who often want and need to use more traditional means of communication, such as telephone and face to face.
The Government’s commitment to a digitally inclusive approach is really important in building public trust. It is also essential for the NHS’s promise of being equally accessible to continue to hold true in our increasingly digital world. The voluntary sector can certainly help by supporting people who are not digital natives and at Age UK we look forward to playing our part in this way.
Julian David, CEO, techUK said:
We welcome today’s announcement as a landmark moment in the digital transformation of the NHS. The enhanced NHS App marks a bold step forward in putting citizens at the centre of their care, empowering patients with the same ease, accessibility, and control we expect from modern digital services.
Ongoing and meaningful engagement with the tech sector will be essential to delivering this transformation at scale. techUK will continue to work with government, NHS bodies, and our members to ensure this transformation is inclusive, secure, and future-ready.
Boosting the App will not only benefit those managing their healthcare digitally but will also free up capacity in traditional healthcare routes and provide more access to care and appointments – freeing up phone lines so calls are answered on time and freeing up GPs’ capacity to offer face-to-face appointments.
The government will aim to empower and upskill everyone to feel confident using the NHS App so that they can benefit from the additional access to services and the greater convenience the App will bring.
The government will continue a partnership with libraries and other community organisations to set people up on the App, with show-and-tells to teach them how to use it and reap the benefits – this will be alongside ongoing work across government to improve access to technology and boost confidence among groups that have previously struggled.
Children’s Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza said:
The foundations for a healthy life are laid in childhood, so an ambition of creating the healthiest generation of children yet is an important step towards tackling the deep inequalities in their healthcare.
I have long called for a child’s ‘red book’ to be digitised, so this is a really welcome move. Taken with plans currently going through Parliament to develop a unique childhood identifier, will vastly improve how we protect and care for the most vulnerable children, with fewer in danger of falling through gaps in services.
Children tell me that when they need additional support, they want it in one place, so creating neighbourhood services that bring different professionals under one roof will make a practical difference in their lives, as will increasing access to GPs and dentists.
Andrew Davies, Executive Director of Digital Health, Association of British HealthTech Industries (ABHI), said:
This transformation of the NHS App is an important milestone for healthcare delivery. A single, secure platform to access a range of services, digital tools and therapeutics, and connect devices will enable patients to more effectively engage with their care.
This plan showcases how HealthTech can drive a more efficient, personalised and accessible NHS, which in turn will free up time for clinicians to focus on care where it is needed most. Our members look forward to working with the NHS and Government to ensure these digital tools are implemented successfully and deliver meaningful benefits for patients across the country.
Rachel Power, Chief Executive, the Patients Association said:
We welcome the government’s ambition to expand the NHS App as a central part of the 10 Year Health Plan. It could deliver the fundamental change patients have asked for in their interactions with the NHS, including the ability to manage their appointments, self-refer to vital services, and, in three years’ time, be able to view their health records through the Single Patient Record.
Our work with patients shows that those using the app often feel more in control and more satisfied with their care. But with nearly one in four still facing barriers to digital access, we must ensure that innovation doesn’t come at the cost of inclusion. If the NHS App is to become the digital front door, there must always be a real-world, accessible front door as well, with face-to-face or telephone options in place for those who need or want them. True progress means making the system work for everyone.
Professor Habib Naqvi, chief executive of the NHS Race and Health Observatory, said:
We need a more focused and systematic approach to tackling health inequalities and addressing unacceptable variation in healthcare amongst our communities. A key enabler for this endeavour is digital tools. The transformation of the NHS App has the potential to lead to a more efficient, agile, and technologically enabled NHS – an NHS that will deliver care quicker and closer to where people live. The App will empower people and transform the way the public receives healthcare and engages with NHS services. The Observatory will help ensure this shift, in the way healthcare is provided, benefits all communities equitable.
Jacob Lant, Chief Executive of National Voices said:
Technology is moving at a blistering pace, and quite simply the NHS has failed to keep up. So, the increased emphasis on the App and other digital services is welcome, especially where it can help the NHS meet expectations that have become common place in other sectors.
Critically the Plan recognises there will always be patients with more complex needs and commits to using the resource freed up by digital innovations to continue offering more traditional forms of access to those who need it.”
Richard Stubbs, Chair of the Health Innovation Network said:
It is right that the 10 Year Health Plan will establish the digital and data foundations of the NHS to realise the potential of health innovation in empowering patients, better supporting the NHS workforce and driving economic growth in every community.
The Health Innovation welcomes the focus on AI, expansion of the NHS App and the commitment to a single patient record, all of which will involve innovation partnerships to deliver change to local services, that will have a national impact.
The 15 health innovation networks across England, look ahead to operationalising these plans and working with our partners to find, test and implement at scale innovations that improve patient outcomes, increased NHS productivity and reduce waiting lists, while delivering economic growth. If we get this right we will not only greatly increase outcomes and satisfaction for our patients, but we will also boost our essential life sciences sector and, as our Defining the Size of the Health Innovation Prize report found, add up to £278bn a year to the UK economy.
The Central government will convene an all-party meeting on July 19, ahead of the Monsoon Session 2025, said Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Thursday.
Rijiju said, “The central government called an all-party meeting on July 19 regarding the monsoon session of Parliament. The monsoon session of Parliament is starting from July 21 and will run till August 21.”
The Monsoon Session of Parliament will be held from July 21 to August 21. There will be no Parliament sittings on August 13 and 14 due to Independence Day celebrations.
Earlier in a post on X, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju wrote, “The Hon’ble President of India has approved the proposal of the Government to convene the Monsoon Session of Parliament from 21st July to 21st August, 2025. In view of the Independence Day celebrations, there will be no sittings on the 13th and 14th of August.”
This comes amid the demand by Opposition leaders to convene a special session of Parliament upon the arrival of all-party delegations to discuss various issues, especially the developments that followed the ghastly Pahalgam terrorist attack.
The upcoming Monsoon session will be the first Parliament session following Operation Sindoor, which was launched by India on May 7 in response to a terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam, which claimed 26 lives.
The Budget session of Parliament began on January 31 this year. The Budget Session saw the passage of significant legislation, including Waqf Amendment Bill.
Rijiju held a press conference after the end of the Budget Session, informing that the first part of the Budget Session yielded a total of 9 sittings of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. In the second part of the Session, there were 17 sittings of both Houses. During the entire Budget Session, in total, there were 26 sittings.
During the second part of the Session, Demands for Grants of individual Ministries of Railways, Jal Shakti and Agriculture & Farmers Welfare were discussed and voted in Lok Sabha. In the end the Demands for Grants of the remaining Ministries/ Departments were put to the Vote of the House on Friday, the 21st of March, 2025. The related Appropriation Bill was also introduced, considered and passed by Lok Sabha on 21.03.2025 itself.
Appropriation Bills relating to Second and Final Batch of Supplementary Demands for Grants for the year 2024-25; Excess Demands for Grants for the year 2021-22 and Supplementary Demands for Grants of Manipur for the year 2024-25 and Demands for Grant on Account for the year 2025-26 in respect of the State of Manipur were also passed on 11.03.2025 in Lok Sabha.
The Finance Bill, 2025 was passed by Lok Sabha on March 25.
In the Rajya Sabha the working of the Ministries of Education, Railways, Health & Family Welfare and Home Affairs were discussed.
APIA, SAMOA – The Samoa Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF), in partnership with the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), co-hosted a national validation workshop to present and discuss findings from Samoa’s first Cost and Affordability Analysis of Diets.
The workshop brought together representatives from government ministries, UN agencies, international and national non-governmental organisations, civil society, and the private sector to review and validate the findings of the diet cost analysis, and to discuss how the results can inform policies and programmes aimed at improving diet quality and affordability in response to the country’s high burden of non-communicable diseases.
“This workshop is a pivotal step in our collective journey to address one of the most pressing development challenges of our time – ensuring access to affordable, nutritious and healthy diets for all Samoans, especially our most vulnerable,” said Seumalo Afele Faiilagi, Acting Chief Executive Officer of MAF Samoa, “We are confronting the real-life consequences of poor diets – malnutrition, obesity, non-communicable diseases and intergenerational cycles of poor health – that are now too common across our communities.”
TheCost and Affordability Analysis of Dietsis a flagship initiative of the joint UN Sustainable Development Goals Fund programme,Catalysing the Samoa National Food Systems Transformation Agenda Through Collective Action, by the Rome-Based Agencies (WFP, Food and Agriculture Organization, and International Fund for Agricultural Development). It supports national priorities outlined in theSamoa Food Systems Pathway 2030, the National Food and Nutrition Policy & Plan of Action 2021–2026, the Health Sector Plan 2019/20–2029/30,andthe Agriculture and Fisheries Sector Plan 2022/23–2026/27.
Drawing on data from the Samoa Bureau of Statistics, the Ministry of Health and other partners, and informed by extensive national stakeholder consultations, the recommendations of theCost and Affordability Analysis of Dietswill inform decision-making across key sectors including agriculture, health, education at both national and community level.
“This is a pivotal moment in Samoa’s journey to transform its food systems and place nutrition at the centre of national development,” said Alpha Bah, WFP Representative for the Pacific. “WFP is proud to support the Government of Samoa and partners in turning evidence into action.”
During the workshop, sectoral working groups contributed insights to validate the findings and proposed tailored actions to help ensure the results lead to meaningful change. Civil society organisations were present to ensure the analysis is grounded in local realities and support community-led solutions.
“I wish to emphasise again the UN system’s commitment to supporting the Government of Samoa in creating a future where every Samoan has access to the nutritious food needed to lead healthy and productive lives,” said Karla Hershey, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Samoa.
This initiative reaffirms the strong commitment of the Government of Samoa and WFP to enhance food and nutrition security for Samoans, particularly for the most vulnerable populations.
# # #
The Samoa Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is committed to promoting sustainable agricultural and fisheries practices to ensure food security and improve the livelihoods of Samoan communities.
The United Nations World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters and the impact of climate change.
Follow us on X, formerly Twitter, via @wfp_media and @wfp_Pacific_
APIA, SAMOA – The Samoa Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF), in partnership with the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), co-hosted a national validation workshop to present and discuss findings from Samoa’s first Cost and Affordability Analysis of Diets.
The workshop brought together representatives from government ministries, UN agencies, international and national non-governmental organisations, civil society, and the private sector to review and validate the findings of the diet cost analysis, and to discuss how the results can inform policies and programmes aimed at improving diet quality and affordability in response to the country’s high burden of non-communicable diseases.
“This workshop is a pivotal step in our collective journey to address one of the most pressing development challenges of our time – ensuring access to affordable, nutritious and healthy diets for all Samoans, especially our most vulnerable,” said Seumalo Afele Faiilagi, Acting Chief Executive Officer of MAF Samoa, “We are confronting the real-life consequences of poor diets – malnutrition, obesity, non-communicable diseases and intergenerational cycles of poor health – that are now too common across our communities.”
TheCost and Affordability Analysis of Dietsis a flagship initiative of the joint UN Sustainable Development Goals Fund programme,Catalysing the Samoa National Food Systems Transformation Agenda Through Collective Action, by the Rome-Based Agencies (WFP, Food and Agriculture Organization, and International Fund for Agricultural Development). It supports national priorities outlined in theSamoa Food Systems Pathway 2030, the National Food and Nutrition Policy & Plan of Action 2021–2026, the Health Sector Plan 2019/20–2029/30,andthe Agriculture and Fisheries Sector Plan 2022/23–2026/27.
Drawing on data from the Samoa Bureau of Statistics, the Ministry of Health and other partners, and informed by extensive national stakeholder consultations, the recommendations of theCost and Affordability Analysis of Dietswill inform decision-making across key sectors including agriculture, health, education at both national and community level.
“This is a pivotal moment in Samoa’s journey to transform its food systems and place nutrition at the centre of national development,” said Alpha Bah, WFP Representative for the Pacific. “WFP is proud to support the Government of Samoa and partners in turning evidence into action.”
During the workshop, sectoral working groups contributed insights to validate the findings and proposed tailored actions to help ensure the results lead to meaningful change. Civil society organisations were present to ensure the analysis is grounded in local realities and support community-led solutions.
“I wish to emphasise again the UN system’s commitment to supporting the Government of Samoa in creating a future where every Samoan has access to the nutritious food needed to lead healthy and productive lives,” said Karla Hershey, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Samoa.
This initiative reaffirms the strong commitment of the Government of Samoa and WFP to enhance food and nutrition security for Samoans, particularly for the most vulnerable populations.
# # #
The Samoa Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is committed to promoting sustainable agricultural and fisheries practices to ensure food security and improve the livelihoods of Samoan communities.
The United Nations World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters and the impact of climate change.
Follow us on X, formerly Twitter, via @wfp_media and @wfp_Pacific_
APIA, SAMOA – The Samoa Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF), in partnership with the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), co-hosted a national validation workshop to present and discuss findings from Samoa’s first Cost and Affordability Analysis of Diets.
The workshop brought together representatives from government ministries, UN agencies, international and national non-governmental organisations, civil society, and the private sector to review and validate the findings of the diet cost analysis, and to discuss how the results can inform policies and programmes aimed at improving diet quality and affordability in response to the country’s high burden of non-communicable diseases.
“This workshop is a pivotal step in our collective journey to address one of the most pressing development challenges of our time – ensuring access to affordable, nutritious and healthy diets for all Samoans, especially our most vulnerable,” said Seumalo Afele Faiilagi, Acting Chief Executive Officer of MAF Samoa, “We are confronting the real-life consequences of poor diets – malnutrition, obesity, non-communicable diseases and intergenerational cycles of poor health – that are now too common across our communities.”
TheCost and Affordability Analysis of Dietsis a flagship initiative of the joint UN Sustainable Development Goals Fund programme,Catalysing the Samoa National Food Systems Transformation Agenda Through Collective Action, by the Rome-Based Agencies (WFP, Food and Agriculture Organization, and International Fund for Agricultural Development). It supports national priorities outlined in theSamoa Food Systems Pathway 2030, the National Food and Nutrition Policy & Plan of Action 2021–2026, the Health Sector Plan 2019/20–2029/30,andthe Agriculture and Fisheries Sector Plan 2022/23–2026/27.
Drawing on data from the Samoa Bureau of Statistics, the Ministry of Health and other partners, and informed by extensive national stakeholder consultations, the recommendations of theCost and Affordability Analysis of Dietswill inform decision-making across key sectors including agriculture, health, education at both national and community level.
“This is a pivotal moment in Samoa’s journey to transform its food systems and place nutrition at the centre of national development,” said Alpha Bah, WFP Representative for the Pacific. “WFP is proud to support the Government of Samoa and partners in turning evidence into action.”
During the workshop, sectoral working groups contributed insights to validate the findings and proposed tailored actions to help ensure the results lead to meaningful change. Civil society organisations were present to ensure the analysis is grounded in local realities and support community-led solutions.
“I wish to emphasise again the UN system’s commitment to supporting the Government of Samoa in creating a future where every Samoan has access to the nutritious food needed to lead healthy and productive lives,” said Karla Hershey, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Samoa.
This initiative reaffirms the strong commitment of the Government of Samoa and WFP to enhance food and nutrition security for Samoans, particularly for the most vulnerable populations.
# # #
The Samoa Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries is committed to promoting sustainable agricultural and fisheries practices to ensure food security and improve the livelihoods of Samoan communities.
The United Nations World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters and the impact of climate change.
Follow us on X, formerly Twitter, via @wfp_media and @wfp_Pacific_
On 25 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded its participation in a 36-hour nuclear emergency exercise organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The exercise was part of the IAEA’s Level 3 Convention Exercise (ConvEx-3), the highest and most complex level of its emergency exercises. These large-scale exercises are conducted every three to five years to test emergency preparedness and response capacities and identify areas in need of improvement. The last ConvEx-3 exercise took place in 2021 in cooperation with the United Arab Emirates.
The exercise involved more than 75 countries and 10 international organizations and was based on a simulated accident at a nuclear power plant in Romania, resulting in the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. Participating countries and organizations exchanged information in real time, assessed evolving risks, coordinated communications, and decided on appropriate protective actions, including the medical response.
As part of the simulation, WHO set up an Incident Management Support Team composed of experts from country, regional and headquarters offices. The WHO teams liaised with national authorities to monitor the public health impact, developed public health messages on protective actions, and provided guidance on mental health support for affected communities and emergency responders.
New elements this year included the close coordination of protective measures by neighbouring countries Bulgaria and the Republic of Moldova, the deployment of international assistance missions and the additional challenge of cybersecurity threats. An expanded social media simulator was used to test crisis communication strategies.
By simulating high-risk cross-border nuclear emergencies, these exercises test existing structures and technical readiness, help build trust and strengthen a coordinated global response. WHO’s ongoing work to strengthen radiation protection of the public, patients and workers worldwide includes providing Member States with evidence-based guidance, tools and technical advice on public health issues related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
Following the exercise, the IAEA will compile and publish a detailed review of best practices and areas for improvement. WHO will review the lessons learned and adjust processes accordingly.
On 25 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded its participation in a 36-hour nuclear emergency exercise organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The exercise was part of the IAEA’s Level 3 Convention Exercise (ConvEx-3), the highest and most complex level of its emergency exercises. These large-scale exercises are conducted every three to five years to test emergency preparedness and response capacities and identify areas in need of improvement. The last ConvEx-3 exercise took place in 2021 in cooperation with the United Arab Emirates.
The exercise involved more than 75 countries and 10 international organizations and was based on a simulated accident at a nuclear power plant in Romania, resulting in the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. Participating countries and organizations exchanged information in real time, assessed evolving risks, coordinated communications, and decided on appropriate protective actions, including the medical response.
As part of the simulation, WHO set up an Incident Management Support Team composed of experts from country, regional and headquarters offices. The WHO teams liaised with national authorities to monitor the public health impact, developed public health messages on protective actions, and provided guidance on mental health support for affected communities and emergency responders.
New elements this year included the close coordination of protective measures by neighbouring countries Bulgaria and the Republic of Moldova, the deployment of international assistance missions and the additional challenge of cybersecurity threats. An expanded social media simulator was used to test crisis communication strategies.
By simulating high-risk cross-border nuclear emergencies, these exercises test existing structures and technical readiness, help build trust and strengthen a coordinated global response. WHO’s ongoing work to strengthen radiation protection of the public, patients and workers worldwide includes providing Member States with evidence-based guidance, tools and technical advice on public health issues related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
Following the exercise, the IAEA will compile and publish a detailed review of best practices and areas for improvement. WHO will review the lessons learned and adjust processes accordingly.
On 25 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded its participation in a 36-hour nuclear emergency exercise organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The exercise was part of the IAEA’s Level 3 Convention Exercise (ConvEx-3), the highest and most complex level of its emergency exercises. These large-scale exercises are conducted every three to five years to test emergency preparedness and response capacities and identify areas in need of improvement. The last ConvEx-3 exercise took place in 2021 in cooperation with the United Arab Emirates.
The exercise involved more than 75 countries and 10 international organizations and was based on a simulated accident at a nuclear power plant in Romania, resulting in the release of significant amounts of radioactive material. Participating countries and organizations exchanged information in real time, assessed evolving risks, coordinated communications, and decided on appropriate protective actions, including the medical response.
As part of the simulation, WHO set up an Incident Management Support Team composed of experts from country, regional and headquarters offices. The WHO teams liaised with national authorities to monitor the public health impact, developed public health messages on protective actions, and provided guidance on mental health support for affected communities and emergency responders.
New elements this year included the close coordination of protective measures by neighbouring countries Bulgaria and the Republic of Moldova, the deployment of international assistance missions and the additional challenge of cybersecurity threats. An expanded social media simulator was used to test crisis communication strategies.
By simulating high-risk cross-border nuclear emergencies, these exercises test existing structures and technical readiness, help build trust and strengthen a coordinated global response. WHO’s ongoing work to strengthen radiation protection of the public, patients and workers worldwide includes providing Member States with evidence-based guidance, tools and technical advice on public health issues related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
Following the exercise, the IAEA will compile and publish a detailed review of best practices and areas for improvement. WHO will review the lessons learned and adjust processes accordingly.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Speech
PM speech at the launch of the 10 Year Health Plan: 3 July 2025
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s speech at the launch of the 10 Year Health Plan.
Thank you Rachel, thank you Wes. And thank you Denyse. Come and sit down with us. Denyse’s story is fantastic. Because she works here. She lives in this borough and she uses the services here.
What a great testament that is. And Denyse, thank you for your introduction and thank you for your words.
It’s a privilege to be here with you in Stratford. I’ve seen the work that you have been doing this morning. And I’m sorry for interrupting your work.
I do understand how hard it is. My mum worked in the NHS. She was a nurse, a proud nurse. My sister worked in the NHS and my wife still works in the NHS in one of the big London hospitals. So I do understand what you do, how you do it, what you put in and why you do it.
So let me start by saying a big thank you to all of you for what you do, and if I may, through you, to say thank you to all NHS staff right across the country who do what they do as public servants by treating and caring for other people.
Thank you also for welcoming us here. To your Neighbourhood Health Centre. Because it’s buildings like this here that represent the future of the NHS.
As I’ve just had the chance to go around and see some of the work that’s going on here. The 24 teams that you have got working on dentistry. I’m really pleased to see that you don’t need an appointment, you can walk in. You have got children and families up there on the next floor having their teeth done. That’s hugely important.
And that’s what a Neighbourhood Health Service can do working in partnership with the people it serves. And Denyse you are the embodiment of that.
Power and control in their hands. Care closer to their community. Services organised around their lives.
But look – before I say a bit more about the future in a minute. But it is important that we go back a year to the NHS left by the last government. With record waiting lists. The lowest ever satisfaction. I know the toll that takes on staff who work so hard.
100,000 children waiting more than six hours in A&E.
Now – I’m not going to stand here and say that everything is perfect now. We have so much work to do and we will do it.
But let’s be under absolutely no illusions. Because of the fair choices we made, the tough [political content redacted] decisions we made the future already looks better for our NHS.
That’s the story of this Government in a nutshell. With breakfast clubs, hugely important for children coming into schools so they are ready to learn.
Potholes across the country – filled. Fuel duty – frozen. Four interest rate cuts, hugely important for mortgage holders.
Setting up Great British energy, levelling up workers’ rights, record investment in affordable housing, infrastructure the length and breadth of our country.
It’s all down to the foundation we laid this year. All down to the path of renewal that we chose.
The decisions made by the Chancellor, by Rachel Reeves which mean we can invest record amounts in the NHS.
Already over 6000 mental health workers recruited.
1700 new GPs.
170 Community Diagnostic Centres, really important, already open.
New surgical hubs, new mental health units, new ambulance sites. Record investment – right across the system.
And because of all that the results are crystal clear.
At the last election a year ago, we promised two million extra appointments in the NHS in the first year of [political content redacted] government.
We have now delivered four million extra appointments and that’s thanks to your hard work and that of your colleagues.
4 million. That’s a record amount for a single year ever. And I want to thank you for the part that you have played in that.
That is what change looks like.
A promise made and a promised delivered.
And turning those statistics into the human is really important. So let me tell you about Jane.
At Christmas, she was taken to hospital with back pain.
And the diagnosis was not good. She needed her gallbladder removed. Jane asked as you can imagine “how long will I have to wait”.
And they said – “I’m sorry, but at the moment it could take up to ten months.”
Yet – because we have speeded up electives, because we have speeded up appointments, by May – she was offered a private appointment, paid for by the NHS, as part of our plan.
And now Jane is pain free.
Five months – not ten.
She’s got five months back – free from pain, free from anxiety and in a sense her life is no longer on hold.
That’s what change looks like in human terms. [Political content redacted.]
But we have to keep going.
We are fixing the foundations. We made choices no other government would have made and we are starting to repair the damage done to the NHS and public health, through Covid and austerity.
But reform isn’t just about fixing problems. It’s also about seizing opportunities.
And the way I see it – there is an opportunity here.
Because the NHS is at a turning point in its history.
We’re an older society now. Disease has changed.
Conditions are chronic, they are long-term, they need to be managed. And that means we need to reform the NHS to make it fit for the future.
With the technology that is available to us now, we have an unprecedented chance to do that to make care better.
To transform the relationship between people and the state. To give patients more power and control. And this is about fairness.
Millions of people across Britain no longer feel they get a fair deal.
And it’s starting to affect the pride, the hope, the optimism they have in this great country.
Our job is to change that. And the NHS is a huge part of it. I mean – for 77 years this weekend the NHS has been an embodiment if you like of British pride, hope, that basic sense of fairness and decency.
77 years – of everyone paying in, working hard, doing the right thing, secure in the knowledge, that if they or their family needs it, the NHS will be there for them.
In ten years’ time – when this plan has run its course, I want people to say this was the moment, this was the government that secured those values for the future.
And look – when people are uncertain about the deal they are getting from this country, what fairer way is there to respond to that than by giving them more control.
By partnering with them, to build an NHS that is fit to face the future.
That’s what this plan that we are launching today will do.
And it will do so in three ways.
Three shifts that will transform healthcare in this country.
First – we will shift the NHS away from being only a sickness service to a health service that is genuinely preventative in the first place, prevents disease in the first place.
That means a stronger focus on vaccination, on screening, early diagnosis.
Things like innovative weight loss services – available in pharmacies.
Working with major food businesses – to make their products healthier.
Better mental health support, particularly for our young people. And starting with children aged sixteen this year we will raise the first entirely smoke-free generation.
Second – we will shift the NHS away from being a hospital-dominated service to being a community, neighbourhood health service.
You can see why we chose to come here. Places like this are the future of our NHS. You don’t have to book an appointment. You can just walk in. There are families here and people who use the services live in this area.
Now of course hospitals will always be important – for acute services especially.
But I say it again – disease has changed. And we must change with it.
And not only can we do that. We can do it in a way that improves care and convenience for millions of people.
So just imagining nurses, doctors, pharmacists, dentists, carers, health visitors all under one roof.
But also, services like debt advice, employment support, smoking cessation: preventative services which we know are so crucial for a healthy life.
Now that is an exciting prospect.
You know – the idea that the future of healthcare is no longer defined by top-down citadels of the central state.
But is instead here – in your home, in your community, in your hands, that’s an inspiring vision of change.
It will bring the state and the people it serves into a partnership on something we all care deeply about.
But more importantly. It means a future where we have better GP access, no more 8am scrambles, more dental care for your children, better care on your doorstep and a Neighbourhood Health Centres like this in our coastal towns, in rural counties, in every community across the country. Every community across the country.
Finally – the third shift from the analogue NHS we have at the moment to a truly digital health service.
A health service capable of seizing the enormous opportunities before us in science and technology.
In genomics, in artificial intelligence, advanced robotics.
Look – I have seen in your everyday lives what this can do.
I’ve spoken to stroke patients who have had their lives saved by technology and AI because it could find the blood clot in their brain in milliseconds, giving them just enough time to be operated on and saving their lives.
So this plan – backs technology to deliver. Because it can and will save thousands of lives. But it’s not just about saving lives.
AI and technology is an opportunity to make services more human.
That always sounds counterintuitive, but it does because what it gives all of you and all of your colleagues is more time to care, more time to do the things that only human beings can do which is that care that is needed, the professional skills that you have. So this will make it a more human service as well.
It gives you more time to care, to do all the things that brought you into the NHS in the first place.
And it’s not just cutting-edge technology either.
Technology like the phones in the pockets of everyone in this room we can use that too.
Now, you won’t hear this often in a speech – but look at your phones. But look at your apps! Seriously! Because what you see on that screen is that entire industries have reorganised around apps.
Retail, transport, finance, weather – you name it.
Why can’t we do that with health?
Why not the NHS app on your phone?
Making use of the same dynamic force to cut waiting lists at your hospital.
To make it easier for you to get a GP appointment, to give you more control over our health.
There’s no good reason why we can’t. So I can announce today, as part of this plan, that we can, and we will transform the NHS App so that it becomes an indispensable part of life for everyone.
It will become – as technology develops – like having a doctor in your pocket.
Providing you with 24 hours advice, seven days a week.
An NHS that really is always there when you need it.
Booking appointments at your convenience, ordering your prescriptions, guiding you to local charities or businesses that can improve your wellbeing.
And perhaps most importantly, holding all healthcare data in an easily accessible, single patient record.
Don’t underestimate how important that is.
I’ve been up to Alder Hey hospital in Liverpool many times, it’s a children’s hospital, it’s a brilliant hospital.
One of the times I was there I was on the ward, particularly young children were having heart surgery.
I have to tell you it was really humbling both seeing what the children were going through but also what the professional staff were doing.
When I went into a particular ward, I saw a two year old boy who had just had major heart surgery, it’s an incredible thing to see.
And I spoke to his parents who were at his bedside throughout.
One of the things they raised with me was the distress they felt that they had to go through every single condition that he had over and over again, whether they went to Blackpool, in Liverpool, at Alder Hey.
They were actually welling up telling me it’s a really difficult story for us, this is really hard. And we don’t want to keep having to repeat it, why can’t it be recorded the first time around?
I will remember their faces and the story they told me for a very long time.
But we can fix that. We can make it more accessible. We can bring this together in one place.
And there are other examples as well. That red book that every child gets. Why can’t that be digital? There’s no good reason.
And so that’s exactly what we’ll do.
We will turn this app into a new front door for the entire NHS.
A reformed, modernised and renewed – Neighbourhood Health Service.
That is the plan we launch today.
That is the change we will deliver.
[Political content redacted.]
The NHS on its feet. Facing the future. Delivering fairness and security for working people.
From the Himalayas to the coasts, Samsung Members came together for a one-of-a-kind virtual celebration of innovation, connection, and community.
For the very first time, Samsung Members Connect went virtual—and what a success it was! On 25th June 2025, thousands of Galaxy users from every corner of India joined in from the comfort of their homes to be part of an experience that brought the best of Galaxy right to their screens.
JB Park, President & CEO, Samsung Southwest Asia addressing the Samsung Members during the live connect
A Nationwide Celebration of Galaxy AI and Innovation
In response to the growing requests from Members across India, Samsung reimagined its flagship community engagement event—breaking geographical barriers and creating an inclusive platform where anyone with a Galaxy device could participate.
The result? A dynamic, content-rich experience that immersed participants in the latest innovations across Galaxy AI, the Galaxy Ecosystem, Samsung Wallet, Samsung Health, SmartThings, and more.
Samsung Members Connect has always been about celebrating the people who use and shape Samsung’s innovations and technology. This year, Samsung opened the experience to every Galaxy user in India, no matter where they are. The overwhelming participation and love the event received reaffirm Samsung’s belief in the power of community and innovation.
Ridhi Chugh, General Manager, Multi Device Experience sharing the nuances of SmartThings for Home AI with members
Power-Packed Sessions. Passionate Participants.
The virtual event featured curated sessions led by Samsung experts, offering deep dives into the latest Galaxy AI-powered features—from creative content generation to smarter communication and productivity tools.
Participants also explored how the Galaxy Ecosystem works seamlessly across phones, tablets, wearables, and even smart homes. Engaging demonstrations showcased how SmartThings and Samsung Health are shaping connected and healthier lifestyles.
The camera deep-dive, always a crowd favorite, gave Members valuable tips on unlocking the pro-level capabilities of their Galaxy cameras—turning everyday users into creators.
Anshul Subramanian, Engineer, Android Application talking the Galaxy AI Visual Experience
Community. Interaction. Surprises.
What truly set this event apart was the energy and enthusiasm of the Galaxy community. Interactive Q&A sessions kept the engagement high throughout the day. Lucky draws, exclusive giveaways, and surprise shoutouts added moments of delight and joy.
Several Members shared how being part of this virtual event made them feel seen, heard, and connected—especially those attending a Samsung event for the first time.
“This year, Samsung Members Connect was an incredible experience. It was my deep dive into innovation, smart living and the ever-evolving Galaxy Ecosystem – I walked away inspired and informed,” said Yash Agarwal, a Samsung Member.
“As someone living in a small town, I’ve always wanted to be part of Members Connect. Joining virtually today made me feel like I was right there with the rest of the Galaxy family,” said Vedant Kalore, a Samsung Member.
Looking Ahead
With the success of the first-ever virtual Samsung Members Connect, the brand has set a new benchmark in community engagement—where every Galaxy user, regardless of geography, has a front-row seat to innovation.
This event wasn’t just a showcase of cutting-edge tech—it was a celebration of the people who bring Galaxy to life.
Until next time, keep exploring, creating, and connecting—with Galaxy by your side.
Luis Vassy, President of Sciences Po, has appointed Paul-André Rosental as Scientific Director.
Paul-André Rosental is a University Professor at Sciences Po, where he has served as Director of the Centre for History since 2022. His research focuses on the history of the biopolitical domain, a broad field encompassing social protection, demography, migration, and public health. With a deeply interdisciplinary academic background, he is the author of several books published both in France and internationally, as well as over one hundred scholarly articles — including around thirty in medical journals. In this field, he has led a major project funded by the European Research Council, rooted in his work as a historian, which has had a tangible impact on occupational health policies in both France and the United States. Paul-André Rosental serves on numerous scientific advisory boards in France and abroad, notably within the Population Europe network in Berlin and the French Institute for Public Health Research (IReSP).
Luis Vassy, President of Sciences Po: “I am proud to entrust the role of Scientific Director to Paul-André Rosental, who is not only a distinguished scholar but also a leading advocate of interdisciplinarity and a perceptive observer of the higher education and research landscape, both in France and abroad. With his exceptional expertise and strategic vision, he will make a decisive contribution to our scientific excellence, to the dynamism and vitality of our research units, to the integration of research and teaching, and to the opening of new fields of scientific inquiry. I am delighted to rely on him to further elevate the intellectual ambition and visibility of Sciences Po.”
Paul-André Rosental, Scientific Director: ” Sciences Po must reflect, teach, and act in a historical moment which marks a break with the post-Cold War era. The reason why a historian offers to lead its scientific policy at such a turning point, is because a long-term perspective is essential to distinguish transformations that echo familiar patterns from those that demand new models of understanding. Thinking through the unprecedented — by strengthening our academic and public presence, and preparing our student and doctoral community for the responsibilities they will bear — will be the guiding principle of my mandate as Scientific Director.”
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications@dhsc.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications@dhsc.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.
Details
The 10 Year Health Plan is part of the government’s health mission to build a health service fit for the future. It sets out how the government will reinvent the NHS through 3 radical shifts:
hospital to community
analogue to digital
sickness to prevention
To support the scale of change we need, the government will ensure the whole NHS is ready to deliver these 3 shifts at pace:
through a new operating model
by ushering in a new era of transparency
by creating a new workforce model with staff genuinely aligned with the future direction of reform
through a reshaped innovation strategy
by taking a different approach to NHS finances
The government committed to co-developing the plan with members of the public, health and care staff and partner organisations. To do this, Change NHS was launched on 21 October 2024 – the biggest ever conversation on the future of the NHS. Through Change NHS, the government received over a quarter of a million contributions from the public, health and care staff, health system leaders and organisations with an interest in health and care.
Canadian researchers recently investigated this idea in a sample of 1,082 undergraduate psychology students. The students completed a survey, which included questions about how they perceived their diet influenced their sleep and dreams.
Some 40% of participants reported certain foods impacted their sleep, with 25% of the whole sample claiming certain foods worsened their sleep, and 20% reporting certain foods improved their sleep.
Only 5.5% of respondents believed what they ate affected the nature of their dreams. But many of these people thought sweets or dairy products (such as cheese) made their dreams more strange or disturbing and worsened their sleep.
In contrast, participants reported fruits, vegetables and herbal teas led to better sleep.
This study used self-reporting, meaning the results rely on the participants recalling and reporting information about their sleep and dreams accurately. This could have affected the results.
It’s also possible participants were already familiar with the notion that cheese causes nightmares, especially given they were psychology students, many of whom may have studied sleep and dreaming.
This awareness could have made them more likely to notice or perceive their sleep was disrupted after eating dairy. In other words, the idea cheese leads to nightmares may have acted like a self-fulfilling prophecy and results may overestimate the actual likelihood of strange dreams.
Nonetheless, these findings show some people perceive a connection between what they eat and how they dream.
While there’s no evidence to prove cheese causes nightmares, there is evidence that does explain a link.
The science behind cheese and nightmares
Humans are diurnal creatures, meaning our body is primed to be asleep at night and awake during the day. Eating cheese before bed means we’re challenging the body with food at a time when it really doesn’t want to be eating.
At night, our physiological systems are not primed to digest food. For example, it takes longer for food to move through our digestive tract at night compared with during the day.
If we eat close to going to sleep, our body has to process and digest the food while we’re sleeping. This is a bit like running through mud – we can do it, but it’s slow and inefficient.
If your body is processing and digesting food instead of focusing all its resources on sleep, this can affect your shut-eye. Research has shown eating close to bedtime reduces our sleep quality, particularly our time spent in rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, which is the stage of sleep associated with vivid dreams.
People will have an even harder time digesting cheese at night if they’re lactose intolerant, which might mean they experience even greater impacts on their sleep. This follows what the Canadian researchers found in their study, with lactose intolerant participants reporting poorer sleep quality and more nightmares.
It’s important to note we might actually have vivid dreams or nightmares every night – what could change is whether we’re aware of the dreams and can remember them when we wake up.
Poor sleep quality often means we wake up more during the night. If we wake up during REM sleep, research shows we’re more likely to report vivid dreams or nightmares that we mightn’t even remember if we hadn’t woken up during them.
This is very relevant for the cheese and nightmares question. Put simply, eating before bed impacts our sleep quality, so we’re more likely to wake up during our nightmares and remember them.
Don’t panic – I’m not here to tell you to give up your cheesy evenings. But what we eat before bed can make a real difference to how well we sleep, so timing matters.
General sleep hygiene guidelines suggest avoiding meals at least two hours before bed. So even if you’re eating a very cheese-heavy meal, you have a window of time before bed to digest the meal and drift off to a nice peaceful sleep.
How about other dairy products?
Cheese isn’t the only dairy product which may influence our sleep. Most of us have heard about the benefits of having a warm glass of milk before bed.
Milk can be easier to digest than cheese. In fact, milk is a good choice in the evening, as it contains tryptophan, an amino acid that helps promote sleep.
Nonetheless, we still don’t want to be challenging our body with too much dairy before bed. Participants in the Canadian study did report nightmares after dairy, and milk close to bed might have contributed to this.
While it’s wise to steer clear of food (especially cheese) in the two hours before lights out, there’s no need to avoid cheese altogether. Enjoy that cheesy pasta or cheese board, just give your body time to digest before heading off to sleep. If you’re having a late night cheese craving, opt for something small. Your sleep (and your dreams) will thank you.
Charlotte Gupta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The lack of reliable information about health facilities across sub-Saharan Africa became very clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amid a surge in emergency care needs, information was lacking about the location of facilities, bed capacity and oxygen availability, and even where to find medical specialists. This data could have enabled precise assessments of hospital surge capacity and geographic access to critical care. Peter Macharia and Emelda Okiro, whose research focuses on public health and equity of health service access in low resource settings, share the findings of their recent study, co-authored with colleagues.
What are open health facility databases?
A health facility is a service delivery point where healthcare services are provided. The facilities can range from small clinics and doctor’s offices to large teaching and referral hospitals.
A health facility database is a list of all health facilities in a country or geographic area, such as a district. A typical database should assign each health facility a unique code, name, size, type (from primary to tertiary), ownership (public or private), operational status (working or closed), location and subnational unit (county or district). It should also record services (emergency obstetric care, for example), capacity (number of beds, for example), infrastructure (electricity availability, for example), contact information (address and email), and when this information was last updated.
The ideal method of compiling this list is to conduct a census, as Kenya did in 2023. But this takes resources. Some countries have compiled lists from existing incomplete ones. Senegal did this and so did Kenya in 2003 and 2008.
This list should be open to stakeholders, including government agencies, development partners and researchers. Health facility lists must be shared through a governance framework that balances data sharing with protections for data subjects and creators. In some countries, such as Kenya and Malawi, these listings are accessible through web portals without additional permission. In others, such facility lists do not exist or require extra permission.
Why are they useful to have?
Facility listings can serve the needs of individuals and communities. They also serve sub-national, national and continental health objectives.
At the individual level, a facility list offers a choice of alternatives to health seekers. At the community level, the data can guide decisions like where to place community health workers, as seen in Mali and Sierra Leone.
Health lists are useful when distributing commodities such as bed nets and allocating resources based on the health needs of the areas they serve. They help in planning for vaccination campaigns by creating detailed immunisation microplans.
By taking account of the disease burden, social dynamics and environmental factors, health services can be tailored to specific needs.
Detailed maps of healthcare resources enable quicker emergency responses by pinpointing facilities equipped for specific crises. Disease surveillance systems depend on continuously collecting data from healthcare facilities.
At the continental level, lists are crucial for a coordinated health system response during pandemics and outbreaks. They can facilitate cross-border planning, pandemic preparedness and collaboration.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, these lists informed where to put additional resources such as makeshift hospitals or transport programmes for adults over 60 years of age.
The lists are used to identify vulnerable populations at risk of emerging pathogens and populations that can benefit from new health facilities.
Many problems arise if we don’t know where health facilities are or what they offer. Healthcare planning becomes inefficient. This can result in duplicate facility lists and the misallocation of resources, which leads to waste and inequities.
We can’t identify populations that lack services. Emergency responses weaken due to uncertainty about where best to move patients with specific conditions.
Resources are wasted when there are duplicate facility lists. For example, between 2010 and 2016, six government departments partnered with development organisations, resulting in ten lists of health facilities in Nigeria.
In Tanzania, over 10 different health facility lists existed in 2009. Maintained by donors and government agencies, the function-specific lists didn’t work together to share information easily and accurately. This prompted the need for a national master facility list.
What needs to happen to build one?
A comprehensive list of health facilities can be compiled through mapping exercises or from existing lists. The health ministry should take responsibility for setting up, developing and updating this list.
Partnerships are crucial for developing facility lists. Stakeholders include donors, implementing and humanitarian partners, technical advisors and research institutions. Many of these have their own project-based lists, which should integrate into a centralised facility list managed by the ministry. The health ministry must foster a transparent environment, encouraging citizens and stakeholders to contribute to enhancing health facility data.
Political and financial commitment from governments is essential. Creating and maintaining a proper list requires significant investment. Expertise and resources are necessary to keep it updated.
A commitment to open data is a necessary step. Open access to these lists makes them more complete, reliable and useful.
Peter Macharia is funded by Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- Belgium (FWO, number 1201925N) for his Senior Postdoctoral Fellowship.
Emelda Okiro receives funding for her research from the Wellcome Trust through a Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (#224272).
The UK is now more than halfway (50.4%) to achieving a net zero carbon economy, which means it has reduced its national emissions significantly compared to 1990.
We should even celebrate that 0.4%. Why? Because every tonne of carbon saved from the atmosphere and every fraction of a degree celsius of warming avoided saves lives and leaves more life-sustaining ecosystems intact for our children and grandchildren.
It also reduces the risk of triggering irreversible, devastating tipping points in the Earth system. We absolutely do not want to go there. Though, it may already be too late to save 90% of warm-water coral reefs, on which hundreds of millions of people depend for food and protection from storms.
Luckily, tipping points can also work in our favour. Researchers like us call them positive tipping points, which kickstart irreversible, self-propelling change towards a more sustainable future.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Solar energy has already crossed a tipping point, having become the cheapest source of power in most of the world. Because it is quick to deploy widely and in a variety of formats and settings, solar is expanding exponentially, including to the roughly 700 million people who don’t have electricity.
Electric vehicle sales have also crossed tipping points in China and several European markets, as evidenced by the abrupt acceleration of their shares in national vehicle fleets. The more people buy them, the cheaper and better they get, which makes even more people buy them – a self-propelling change towards a low-carbon road transport system.
Recent findings from the Climate Change Committee, independent advisers to the UK government on climate policy, show that the UK too may be on the cusp of a positive tipping point for electric vehicles (EVs), but that further work is needed to reach a tipping point for heat pumps.
EV sales are racing ahead
According to the CCC, more than half of the UK’s success in decarbonising its economy since 2008 can be attributed to the energy sector. Here, the transition from electricity generated by coal to gas and, increasingly, renewable sources like solar and wind, has occurred “behind the scenes”, without much disruption to daily life.
However, over 80% of the greenhouse gas emission cuts needed between now and 2030 (the UK aims to reduce emissions by 68% by 2030) need to come from other sectors that require the involvement and support of the public and businesses.
The adoption of low-carbon technologies by households, including the buying of EVs and installing of heat pumps, is a critical next step to determining the success or failure of the UK’s ability to achieve net zero. Cars account for about 15% of the UK’s emissions and home heating a further 18%.
Encouragingly, and despite concerted misinformation campaigns to discredit EVs, sales in the UK accounted for 19.6% of all new cars in 2024, which puts this sector close to the critical 20-25% range for triggering the phase of self-propelling adoption, according to positive tipping points theory.
This rise in EV sales is happening for two main reasons. First, the UK has a rule that bans the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2035, which gives carmakers and buyers a clear deadline to switch.
Second, they are becoming a better choice all round. They’re getting cheaper (some are expected to cost the same as petrol cars between 2026 and 2028), more appealing (with longer ranges and faster charging), and easier to use (thanks to more charging points and better infrastructure).
If this positive trend continues, emissions saved by EV adoption will be sufficient to achieve the UK road transport sector’s 2030 emissions target.
Where is the heat pump tipping point?
Heat pumps have been slower on the uptake in the UK, leading the CCC to identify their deployment as one of the biggest risks to achieving the 2030 emissions target.
The UK government has set a target of installing 600,000 heat pumps a year by 2028. But despite 90% of British homes being suitable for a heat pump, only 1% have one.
There are signs that installations are picking up pace, however. In 2024, 98,000 heat pumps were installed – an increase of 56% from 2023. Deployment will need to be increased more than six times its current rate over the next three years to reach the installation target. In other words, we urgently need to trigger a positive tipping point in this sector.
The triggering of self-propelling change depends on the relative strength of feedbacks that either resist change (damping or negative feedback) or drive it forward (positive feedback).
One important negative feedback highlighted by the CCC is the UK’s high electricity-to-gas price ratio, which increases the running costs of a heat pump on top of the high upfront cost of buying and installing one. Addressing this issue has been at the top of the CCC’s policy recommendations for the last two years.
One positive feedback that needs to be strengthened is the perception among installers of household demand for heat pumps. When installers perceive demand, they are more likely to invest in the training and certifications needed to meet it.
Two ways the CCC suggests the government could encourage installer confidence are to extend the boiler upgrade scheme (which provides grants to households to install heat pumps) and clean heat mechanism (which obliges manufacturers and installers to prioritise heat pumps) and to reinstate the 2035 phase-out rule for new fossil fuel boilers.
An understanding of positive tipping points helps us identify key leverage points where intervention can be most effective in tackling the remaining half of the UK’s emissions. When implemented as part of a coherent national strategy, positive change can be accomplished at the pace and scale required. There is no time to lose.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Kai Greenlees receives funding from the Economic Social Research Council, through the South West Doctoral Training Partnership.
Steven R. Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
US Food and Drug Administration, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Health Fraud Branch
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued an urgent warning about tianeptine – a substance marketed as a dietary supplement but known on the street as “gas station heroin”.
Linked to overdoses and deaths, it is being sold in petrol stations, smoke shops and online retailers, despite never being approved for medical use in the US.
But what exactly is tianeptine, and why is it causing alarm?
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Structurally, it resembles tricyclic antidepressants – an older class of antidepressant – but pharmacologically it behaves very differently. Unlike conventional antidepressants, which typically increase serotonin levels, tianeptine appears to act on the brain’s glutamate system, which is involved in learning and memory.
It is used as a prescription drug in some European, Asian and Latin American countries under brand names like Stablon or Coaxil. But researchers later discovered something unusual, tianeptine also activates the brain’s mu-opioid receptors, the same receptors targeted by morphine and heroin – hence it’s nickname “gas station heroin”.
As a prescription drug, tianeptine is sold under various brand names, including Stablon. Wikimedia Commons
At prescribed doses, the effect is subtle, but in large amounts, tianeptine can trigger euphoria, sedation and eventually dependence. People chasing a high might take doses far beyond anything recommended in medical settings.
Despite never being approved by the FDA, the drug is sold in the US as a “wellness” product or nootropic – a substance supposedly used to enhance mood or mental clarity. It’s packaged as capsules, powders or liquids, often misleadingly labelled as dietary supplements.
This loophole has enabled companies to circumvent regulation. Products like Neptune’s Fix have been promoted as safe and legal alternatives to traditional medications, despite lacking any clinical oversight and often containing unlisted or dangerous ingredients.
Some samples have even been found to contain synthetic cannabinoids and other drugs. According to US poison control data, calls related to tianeptine exposure rose by over 500% between 2018 and 2023. In 2024 alone, the drug was involved in more than 300 poisoning cases. The FDA’s latest advisory included product recalls and import warnings.
Users have taken to the social media site Reddit, including a dedicated channel, and other forums to describe their experiences, both the highs and the grim withdrawals. Some report taking hundreds of pills a day. Others struggle to quit, describing cravings and relapses that mirror those seen with classic opioid addiction.
Since tianeptine doesn’t show up in standard toxicology screenings, health professionals may not recognise it. According to doctors in North America, it could be present in hospital patients without being detected, particularly in cases involving seizures or unusual heart symptoms.
It can be bought online from overseas vendors, and a quick search reveals dozens of sellers offering “research-grade” powder and capsules.
There is little evidence that tianeptine is circulating widely in the UK; to date, just one confirmed sample has been publicly recorded in a national drug testing database. It’s not mentioned in recent Home Office or Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs briefings, and it does not appear in official crime or hospital statistics.
But that may simply reflect the fact that no one is looking for it. Without testing protocols in place, it could be present, just unrecorded.
Because of its chemical structure and unusual effects, if tianeptine did show up in a UK emergency department, it could easily be mistaken for a tricyclic antidepressant overdose, or even dismissed as recreational drug use. This makes it harder to diagnose and treat appropriately.
It’s possible, particularly among people seeking alternatives to harder-to-access opioids, or those looking for a legal high. With its low visibility, online availability and potential for addiction, tianeptine ticks many of the same boxes that once made drugs like mephedrone or spice popular before they were banned.
The UK has seen waves of novel psychoactive substances emerge through similar routes, first appearing online or in head shops, then spreading quietly until authorities responded. If tianeptine follows the same path, by the time it appears on the radar, harm may already be underway.
Michelle Sahai does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
We all need to learn how to place trust in others. It’s easy to be misled. Someone who doesn’t deserve trust can appear a lot like someone who does – and part of growing up in a society is developing the ability to tell the difference.
An important part of this is learning about the signals people give about themselves. These might be a smile, a style of dressing or a way of speaking. In particular, we use accents to make decisions about others – especially in the UK.
But what if people adapt or change their accents to fit into a certain social group or geographical area? Our past research has shown that native speakers are pretty good at spotting such speech. We’ve now published a follow-up study that supports and further strengthens our original results.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
We associate accents with places, classes and groups. Research shows that even infants use accents to determine whether they think someone is considered trustworthy. This can be a problem – studies have demonstrated that accents can affect someone’s odds of getting a job – and potentially the likelihood of being found guilty of a crime.
As with most topics in the social sciences, evolutionary theory has a lot to say about this process. Scientists are interested in understanding how people send and receive signals like accents, how those signals affect relationships between people and how, in turn, those relationships affect us.
But because accents can affect how we treat each other, we’d expect some people to try to change them for personal gain. A social chameleon who can pretend to be a member of any social class or group is likely to win trust within each – assuming they are not caught.
If that’s true, though, then we’d expect people to also be good at detecting when someone is “faking” it – what we call mimicry – setting up a kind of arms race between those who want to deceive us into trusting them and those who try to catch deceivers out.
Over the last few years, we’ve looked into how well people detect accent mimicry. Last year we found that generally speaking, people in the UK and Ireland are strong at this, detecting mimicked accents in the UK and Ireland better than we’d expect by chance alone.
What was more interesting, though, was that native listeners from the specific places of the imitated accent – Belfast, Glasgow and Dublin – were a lot better at this task than were non-natives or native listeners from further away in the UK, like Essex.
Beyond the UK
Our new findings went further, though. Of the roughly 2,000 people that participated, more than 1,500 were this time based in English-speaking countries outside the UK, including the US, Canada and Australia. And on average, this group did a lot worse at detecting mimicked accents from seven different regions in the UK and Ireland than did people from the UK.
In fact, people from places other than the UK barely did better than we’d expect by chance, while people who were native listeners were right between about two-thirds and three-quarters of the time.
As we argued in our original article, we believe it’s local cultural tensions — tribalism, classism or even warfare — that explain the differences. For example, as someone commented to me some time ago, people living in Belfast in the 1970s and 80s – a time of huge political tension – needed to be attuned to the accents of those around them. Hearing something off, like an out-group member’s accent, could signal an imminent threat.
This wouldn’t have put the same pressures on people living in a more peaceful regions. In fact, we found that people living in large, multicultural and largely peaceful areas, such as London, didn’t need to pay much attention to the accents of those around them and were worse at detecting mimicked accents.
The further you move out from the native accent, too, the less likely a listener is to place emphasis on or notice anything wrong with a local accent. Someone living in the US is likely to pay even less attention to an imitation Belfast accent than is someone living in London, and accordingly will be worse at detecting mimicry. Likewise, someone growing up in Australia would be better at spotting a mimicked Australian accent than a Brit.
So while accents, and our ability to detect differences in accents, probably evolved to help us place trust more effectively at a broad level, it’s the cultural environment that shapes that process at the local level.
Together, this has the unfortunate effect that we sometimes place a lot more emphasis on accents than we should. How someone speaks should be a lot less important than what is said.
Still, accents drive how people treat each other at every level of society, just as other signals, be they tattoos, smiles or clothes, that tell us something about another person’s background or heritage.
Learning how these processes work and why they evolved is critical for overcoming them – and helping us to override the biases that so often prevent us from placing trust in people who deserve it.
Jonathan R. Goodman receives funding from the Wellcome Trust (grant no. 220540/Z/20/A).
The global ecosystem of climate finance is complex, constantly changing and sometimes hard to understand. But understanding it is critical to demanding a green transition that’s just and fair. That’s why The Conversation has collaborated with climate finance experts to create this user-friendly guide, in partnership with Vogue Business. With definitions and short videos, we’ll add to this glossary as new terms emerge.
Blue bonds
Blue bonds are debt instruments designed to finance ocean-related conservation, like protecting coral reefs or sustainable fishing. They’re modelled after green bonds but focus specifically on the health of marine ecosystems – this is a key pillar of climate stability.
By investing in blue bonds, governments and private investors can fund marine projects that deliver both environmental benefits and long-term financial returns. Seychelles issued the first blue bond in 2018. Now, more are emerging as ocean conservation becomes a greater priority for global sustainability efforts.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon border adjustment mechanism
Did you know that imported steel could soon face a carbon tax at the EU border? That’s because the carbon border adjustment mechanism is about to shake up the way we trade, produce and price carbon.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is a proposed EU policy to put a carbon price on imports like iron, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity. If a product is made in a country with weaker climate policies, the importer must pay the difference between that country’s carbon price and the EU’s. The goal is to avoid “carbon leakage” – when companies relocate to avoid emissions rules and to ensure fair competition on climate action.
But this mechanism is more than just a tariff tool. It’s a bold attempt to reshape global trade. Countries exporting to the EU may be pushed to adopt greener manufacturing or face higher tariffs.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is controversial: some call it climate protectionism, others argue it could incentivise low-carbon innovation worldwide and be vital for achieving climate justice. Many developing nations worry it could penalise them unfairly unless there’s climate finance to support greener transitions.
Carbon border adjustment mechanism is still evolving, but it’s already forcing companies, investors and governments to rethink emissions accounting, supply chains and competitiveness. It’s a carbon price with global consequences.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon budget
The Paris agreement aims to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2030. The carbon budget is the maximum amount of CO₂ emissions allowed, if we want a 67% chance of staying within this limit. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that the remaining carbon budgets amount to 400 billion tonnes of CO₂ from 2020 onwards.
Think of the carbon budget as a climate allowance. Once it has been spent, the risk of extreme weather or sea level rise increases sharply. If emissions continue unchecked, the budget will be exhausted within years, risking severe climate consequences. The IPCC sets the global carbon budget based on climate science, and governments use this framework to set national emission targets, climate policies and pathways to net zero emissions.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Carbon credits
Carbon credits are like a permit that allow companies to release a certain amount of carbon into the air. One credit usually equals one tonne of CO₂. These credits are issued by the local government or another authorised body and can be bought and sold. Think of it like a budget allowance for pollution. It encourages cuts in carbon emissions each year to stay within those global climate targets.
The aim is to put a price on carbon to encourage cuts in emissions. If a company reduces its emissions and has leftover credits, it can sell them to another company that is going over its limit. But there are issues. Some argue that carbon credit schemes allow polluters to pay their way out of real change, and not all credits are from trustworthy projects. Although carbon credits can play a role in addressing the climate crisis, they are not a solution on their own.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon credits explained.
Carbon offsetting
Carbon offsetting is a way for people or organisations to make up for the carbon emissions they are responsible for. For example, if you contribute to emissions by flying, driving or making goods, you can help balance that out by supporting projects that reduce emissions elsewhere. This might include planting trees (which absorb carbon dioxide) or building wind farms to produce renewable energy.
The idea is that your support helps cancel out the damage you are doing. For example, if your flight creates one tonne of carbon dioxide, you pay to support a project that removes the same amount.
While this sounds like a win-win, carbon offsetting is not perfect. Some argue that it lets people feel better without really changing their behaviour, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as greenwashing.
Not all projects are effective or well managed. For instance, some tree planting initiatives might have taken place anyway, even without the offset funding, deeming your contribution inconsequential. Others might plant the non-native trees in areas where they are unlikely to reach their potential in terms of absorbing carbon emissions.
So, offsetting can help, but it is no magic fix. It works best alongside real efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage low-carbon lifestyles or supply chains.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon offsetting explained.
Carbon tax
A carbon tax is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by placing a direct price on CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.
A carbon tax is grounded in the concept of the social cost of carbon. This is an estimate of the economic damage caused by emitting one tonne of CO₂, including climate-related health, infrastructure and ecosystem impacts.
A carbon tax is typically levied per tonne of CO₂ emitted. The tax can be applied either upstream (on fossil fuel producers) or downstream (on consumers or power generators). This makes carbon-intensive activities more expensive, it incentivises nations, businesses and people to reduce their emissions, while untaxed renewable energy becomes more competitively priced and appealing.
Carbon tax was first introduced by Finland in 1990. Since then, more than 39 jurisdictions have implemented similar schemes. According to the World Bank, carbon pricing mechanisms (that’s both carbon taxes and emissions trading systems) now cover about 24% of global emissions. The remaining 76% are not priced, mainly due to limited coverage in both sectors and geographical areas, plus persistent fossil fuel subsidies. Expanding coverage would require extending carbon pricing to sectors like agriculture and transport, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and strengthening international governance.
What is carbon tax?
Sweden has one of the world’s highest carbon tax rates and has cut emissions by 33% since 1990 while maintaining economic growth. The policy worked because Sweden started early, applied the tax across many industries and maintained clear, consistent communication that kept the public on board.
Canada introduced a national carbon tax in 2019. In Canada, most of the revenue from carbon taxes is returned directly to households through annual rebates, making the scheme revenue-neutral for most families. However, despite its economic logic, inflation and rising fuel prices led to public discontent – especially as many citizens were unaware they were receiving rebates.
Carbon taxes face challenges including political resistance, fairness concerns and low public awareness. Their success depends on clear communication and visible reinvestment of revenues into climate or social goals. A 2025 study that surveyed 40,000 people in 20 countries found that support for carbon taxes increases significantly when revenues are used for environmental infrastructure, rather than returned through tax rebates.
By Meilan Yan, associate professor and senior lecturer in financial economics, Loughborough University
Climate resilience
Floods, wildfires, heatwaves and rising seas are pushing our cities, towns and neighbourhoods to their limits. But there’s a powerful idea that’s helping cities fight back: climate resilience.
Resilience refers to the ability of a system, such as a city, a community or even an ecosystem – to anticipate, prepare for, respond to and recover from climate-related shocks and stresses.
Sometimes people say resilience is about bouncing back. But it’s not just about surviving the next storm. It’s about adapting, evolving and thriving in a changing world.
Resilience means building smarter and better. It means designing homes that stay cool during heatwaves. Roads that don’t wash away in floods. Power grids that don’t fail when the weather turns extreme.
It’s also about people. A truly resilient city protects its most vulnerable. It ensures that everyone – regardless of income, age or background – can weather the storm.
And resilience isn’t just reactive. It’s about using science, local knowledge and innovation to reduce a risk before disaster strikes. From restoring wetlands to cool cities and absorb floods, to creating early warning systems for heatwaves, climate resilience is about weaving strength into the very fabric of our cities.
By Paul O’Hare, senior lecturer in geography and development, Manchester Metropolitan University
The meaning of climate resilience.
Climate risk disclosure
Climate risk disclosure refers to how companies report the risks they face from climate change, such as flood damage, supply chain disruptions or regulatory costs. It includes both physical risks (like storms) and transition risks (like changing laws or consumer preferences).
Mandatory disclosures, such as those proposed by the UK and EU, aim to make climate-related risks transparent to investors. Done well, these reports can shape capital flows toward more sustainable business models. Done poorly, they become greenwashing tools.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Emissions trading scheme
An emissions trading scheme is the primary market-based approach for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in many countries, including Australia, Canada, China and Mexico.
Part of a government’s job is to decide how much of the economy’s carbon emissions it wants to avoid in order to fight climate change. It must put a cap on carbon emissions that economic production is not allowed to surpass. Preferably, the polluters (that’s the manufacturers, fossil fuel companies) should be the ones paying for the cost of climate mitigation.
Regulators could simply tell all the firms how much they are allowed to emit over the next ten years or so. But giving every firm the same allowance across the board is not cost efficient, because avoiding carbon emissions is much harder for some firms (such as steel producers) than others (such as tax consultants). Since governments cannot know each firm’s specific cost profile either, it can’t customise the allowances. Also, monitoring whether polluters actually abide by their assigned limits is extremely costly.
An emissions trading scheme cleverly solves this dilemma using the cap-and-trade mechanism. Instead of assigning each polluter a fixed quota and risking inefficiencies, the government issues a large number of tradable permits – each worth, say, a tonne of CO₂-equivalent (CO₂e) – that sum up to the cap. Firms that can cut greenhouse gas emissions relatively cheaply can then trade their surplus permits to those who find it harder – at a price that makes both better off.
By Mathias Weidinger, environmental economist, University of Oxford
Emissions trading schemes, explained by climate finance expert Mathias Weidinger.
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing
ESG investing stands for environmental, social and governance investing. In simple terms, these are a set of standards that investors use to screen a company’s potential investments.
ESG means choosing to invest in companies that are not only profitable but also responsible. Investors use ESG metrics to assess risks (such as climate liability, labour practices) and align portfolios with sustainability goals by looking at how a company affects our planet and treats its people and communities. While there isn’t one single global body governing ESG, various organisations, ratings agencies and governments all contribute to setting and evolving these metrics.
For example, investing in a company committed to renewable energy and fair labour practices might be considered “ESG aligned”. Supporters believe ESG helps identify risks and create long-term value. Critics argue it can be vague or used for greenwashing, where companies appear sustainable without real action. ESG works best when paired with transparency and clear data. A barrier is that standards vary, and it’s not always clear what counts as ESG.
Why do financial companies and institutions care? Issues like climate change and nature loss pose significant risks, affecting company values and the global economy.
However, gathering reliable ESG information can be difficult. Companies often self-report, and the data isn’t always standardised or up to date. Researchers – including my team at the University of Oxford – are using geospatial data, like satellite imagery and artificial intelligence, to develop global databases for high-impact industries, across all major sectors and geographies, and independently assess environmental and social risks and impacts.
For instance, we can analyse satellite images of a facility over time to monitor its emissions effect on nature and biodiversity, or assess deforestation linked to a company’s supply chain. This allows us to map supply chains, identify high-impact assets, and detect hidden risks and opportunities in key industries, providing an objective, real-time look at their environmental footprint.
The goal is for this to improve ESG ratings and provide clearer, more consistent insights for investors. This approach could help us overcome current data limitations to build a more sustainable financial future.
By Amani Maalouf, senior researcher in spatial finance, University of Oxford
Environmental, social and governance investing explained.
Financed emissions
Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions linked to a bank’s or investor’s lending and investment portfolio, rather than their own operations. For example, a bank that funds a coal mine or invests in fossil fuels is indirectly responsible for the carbon those activities produce.
Measuring financed emissions helps reveal the real climate impact of financial institutions not just their office energy use. It’s a cornerstone of climate accountability in finance and is becoming essential under net zero pledges.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Green bonds
Green bonds are loans issued to fund environmentally beneficial projects, such as energy-efficient buildings or clean transportation. Investors choose them to support climate solutions while earning returns.
Green bonds are a major tool to finance the shift to a low-carbon economy by directing finance toward climate solutions. As climate costs rise, green bonds could help close the funding gap while ensuring transparency and accountability.
Green bonds are required to ensure funds are spent as promised. For instance, imagine a city wants to upgrade its public transportation by adding electric buses to reduce pollution. Instead of raising taxes or slashing other budgets, the city can issue green bonds to raise the necessary capital. Investors buy the bonds, the city gets the funding, and the environment benefits from cleaner air and fewer emissions.
The growing participation of government issuers has improved the transparency and reliability of these investments. The green bond market has grown rapidly in recent years. According to the Bank for International Settlements, the green bond market reached US$2.9 trillion (£2.1 trillion) in 2024 – nearly six times larger than in 2018. At the same time, annual issuance (the total value of green bonds issued in a year) hit US$700 billion, highlighting the increasing role of green finance in tackling climate change.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Just transition
Just transition is the process of moving to a low-carbon society that is environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. In a broad sense, a just transition means focusing on creating a more fair and equal society.
Just transition has existed as a concept since the 1970s. It was originally applied to the green energy transition, protecting workers in the fossil fuel industry as we move towards more sustainable alternatives.
These days, it has so many overlapping issues of justice hidden within it, so the concept is hard to define. Even at the level of UN climate negotiations, global leaders struggle to agree on what a just transition means.
The big battle is between developed countries, who want a very restrictive definition around jobs and skills, and developing countries, who are looking for a much more holistic approach that considers wider system change and includes considerations around human rights, Indigenous people and creating an overall fairer global society.
A just transition is essentially about imagining a future where we have moved beyond fossil fuels and society works better for everyone – but that can look very different in a European city compared to a rural setting in south-east Asia.
For example, in a British city it might mean fewer cars and better public transport. In a rural setting, it might mean new ways of growing crops that are more sustainable, and building homes that are heatwave resistant.
By Alix Dietzel, climate justice and climate policy expert, University of Bristol
The meaning of just transition.
Loss and damage
A global loss and damage fund was agreed by nations at the UN climate summit (Cop27) in 2022. This means that the rich countries of the world put money into a fund that the least developed countries can then call upon when they have a climate emergency.
At the moment, the loss and damage fund is made up of relatively small pots of money. Much more will be needed to provide relief to those who need it most now and in the future.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains loss and damage.
Mitigation v adaptation
Mitigation means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change. Adaptation means adjusting to its effects, like building sea walls or growing heat-resistant crops. Both are essential: mitigation tackles the cause, while adaptation tackles the symptoms.
Globally, most funding goes to mitigation, but vulnerable communities often need adaptation support most. Balancing the two is a major challenge in climate policy, especially for developing countries facing immediate climate threats.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Nationally determined contributions
Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are at the heart of the Paris agreement, the global effort to collectively combat climate change. NDCs are individual climate action plans created by each country. These targets and strategies outline how a country will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change.
Each nation sets its own goals based on its own circumstances and capabilities – there’s no standard NDC. These plans should be updated every five years and countries are encouraged to gradually increase their climate ambitions over time.
The aim is for NDCs to drive real action by guiding policies, attracting investment and inspiring innovation in clean technologies. But current NDCs fall short of the Paris agreement goals and many countries struggle to turn their plans into a reality. NDCs also vary widely in scope and detail so it’s hard to compare efforts across the board. Stronger international collaboration and greater accountability will be crucial.
By Doug Specht, reader in cultural geography and communication, University of Westminster
Fashion depends on water, soil and biodiversity – all natural capital. And forward-thinking designers are now asking: how do we create rather than deplete, how do we restore rather than extract?
Natural capital is the value assigned to the stock of forests, soils, oceans and even minerals such as lithium. It sustains every part of our economy. It’s the bees that pollinate our crops. It’s the wetlands that filter our water and it’s the trees that store carbon and cool our cities.
If we fail to value nature properly, we risk losing it. But if we succeed, we unlock a future that is not only sustainable but also truly regenerative.
My team at the University of Oxford is developing tools to integrate nature into national balance sheets, advising governments on biodiversity, and we’re helping industries from fashion to finance embed nature into their decision making.
Natural capital, explained by a climate finance expert.
By Mette Morsing, professor of business sustainability and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford
Net zero
Reaching net zero means reducing the amount of additional greenhouse gas emissions that accumulate in the atmosphere to zero. This concept was popularised by the Paris agreement, a landmark deal that was agreed at the UN climate summit (Cop21) in 2015 to limit the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
There are some emissions, from farming and aviation for example, that will be very difficult, if not impossible, to reach absolute zero. Hence, the “net”. This allows people, businesses and countries to find ways to suck greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere, effectively cancelling out emissions while trying to reduce them. This can include reforestation, rewilding, direct air capture and carbon capture and storage. The goal is to reach net zero: the point at which no extra greenhouse gases accumulate in Earth’s atmosphere.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains net zero.
For more expert explainer videos, visit The Conversation’s quick climate dictionary playlist here on YouTube.
Mark Maslin is Pro-Vice Provost of the UCL Climate Crisis Grand Challenge and Founding Director of the UCL Centre for Sustainable Aviation. He was co-director of the London NERC Doctoral Training Partnership and is a member of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. He is an advisor to Sheep Included Ltd, Lansons, NetZeroNow and has advised the UK Parliament. He has received grant funding from the NERC, EPSRC, ESRC, DFG, Royal Society, DIFD, BEIS, DECC, FCO, Innovate UK, Carbon Trust, UK Space Agency, European Space Agency, Research England, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust, CIFF, Sprint2020, and British Council. He has received funding from the BBC, Lancet, Laithwaites, Seventh Generation, Channel 4, JLT Re, WWF, Hermes, CAFOD, HP and Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
Amani Maalouf receives funding from IKEA Foundation and UK Research and Innovation (NE/V017756/1).
Narmin Nahidi is affiliated with several academic associations, including the Financial Management Association (FMA), British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA), American Finance Association (AFA), and the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CMBE). These affiliations do not influence the content of this article.
Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.
Alix Dietzel, Dongna Zhang, Doug Specht, Mathias Weidinger, Meilan Yan, and Sankar Sivarajah do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Evidence gathered by Amnesty International demonstrates how over a month since the introduction of its militarized aid distribution system, Israel has continued to use starvation of civilians as a weapon of war against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip and to deliberately impose conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction as part of its ongoing genocide.
Heartbreaking testimonies gathered from medical staff, parents of children hospitalized for malnutrition and displaced Palestinians struggling to survive paint a horrifying picture of acute levels of starvation and desperation in Gaza. Their accounts provide further evidence of the catastrophic suffering caused by Israel’s ongoing restrictions on life-saving aid and its deadly militarized aid scheme coupled with mass forced displacement, relentless bombardment and destruction of life-sustaining infrastructure.
“While the eyes of the world were diverted to the recent hostilities between Israel and Iran, Israel’s genocide has continued unabated in Gaza, including through the infliction of conditions of life that have created a deadly mix of hunger and disease pushing the population past breaking point,” said Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International.
In the month following Israel’s imposition of a militarized “‘aid” scheme run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), hundreds of Palestinians have been killed and thousands injured either near militarized distribution sites or en route to humanitarian aid convoys.
This devastating daily loss of life as desperate Palestinians try to collect aid is the consequence of their deliberate targeting by Israeli forces and the foreseeable consequence of irresponsible and lethal methods of distribution.
Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International.
“This devastating daily loss of life as desperate Palestinians try to collect aid is the consequence of their deliberate targeting by Israeli forces and the foreseeable consequence of irresponsible and lethal methods of distribution,” said Agnès Callamard.
By continuing to prevent UN and other key humanitarian organizations from distributing certain essential items, like food parcels, fuel and shelter, within Gaza and by maintaining a deadly, dehumanizing and ineffective militarized ‘aid’ scheme, Israeli authorities have turned aid-seeking into a booby trap for desperate starved Palestinians. They have also deliberately fueled chaos and compounded suffering instead of alleviating it. The aid delivered is also way below the humanitarian needs of a population that has been experiencing almost daily bombings for the last 20 months.
Israel has continued to restrict the entry of aid and impose its suffocating cruel blockade and even a full siege lasting nearly eighty days.
Agnès Callamard.
“As the occupying power, Israel has a legal obligation to ensure Palestinians in Gaza have access to food, medicine and other supplies essential for their survival. Instead, it has brazenly defied binding orders issued by the International Court of Justice in January, March and May 2024, to allow the unimpeded flow of aid to Gaza. Israel has continued to restrict the entry of aid and impose its suffocating cruel blockade and even a full siege lasting nearly eighty days,” said Agnès Callamard.
This must end now. Israel must lift all restrictions and allow unfettered, safe, and dignified access to humanitarian aid throughout Gaza immediately.”
Amnesty International interviewed 17 internally displaced people (10 women and seven men) as well as the parents of four children hospitalized for severe malnutrition, and four healthcare workers, across three hospitals in Gaza City and Khan Younis in May and June 2025.
Devastating impact on children
Even before the imposition of a total siege on 2 March 2025, slightly but insufficiently eased some 78 days later, Israel’s deliberate imposition of conditions of life calculated to destroy Palestinians had had a particularly devastating impact on young children and pregnant and breastfeeding women.
Since October 2023 at least 66 children have died as a direct result of malnutrition-related conditions. This figure does not include the many more children who have died as a result of preventable diseases exacerbated by malnutrition.
The victims include four-month-old baby, Jinan Iskafi, who tragically died on 3 May 2025 due to severe malnutrition. According to her medical report, which was reviewed by Amnesty International, Jinan was admitted to the Rantissi pediatric hospital due to severe dehydration and recurrent infections. She was diagnosed with Marasmus, a severe form of protein-energy malnutrition, chronic diarrhea, and a suspected case of immunodeficiency. The pediatrician treating her told Amnesty International that she required a specific lactose-free formula, which was not available due to the blockade.
Gaza’s decimated health sector, already overwhelmed with the volume of injuries, is struggling to deal with the influx of infants and children hospitalized for malnutrition. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), as of 15 June 2025, a total of 18,741, children were hospitalized for acute malnutrition since the beginning of the year.
The vast majority of children suffering from malnutrition, however, cannot reach any hospital due to access challenges posed by displacement orders and heavy bombardment and ongoing military operations.
Numbers barely scratch the surface of the suffering in Gaza
Accounts from healthcare workers and displaced individuals paint an even more harrowing picture.
Susan Maarouf, a nutritional expert at the Nutrition unit in the Patient Friend Benevolent Society hospital in Gaza City, supported by the organizations Medical Aid for Palestinians and MedGlobal, said that in June 2024 the hospital opened a dedicated department for children aged six months to and five years to manage cases of severe malnutrition.
“Back then, Gaza City and the North Gaza governorate were hit by malnutrition [as a result of the tight blockade]. But this year for us the situation began to drastically get worse again in April. Since then, out of approximately 200-250 children we have screened daily for malnutrition. Nearly 15% showed signs associated with severe or moderate malnutrition,” she said.
In the worst cases visible signs include pale skin, falling hair and nails, and alarming weight loss. She expressed the profound helplessness of offering nutritional advice amid severe shortages of food, with fruit, vegetables and eggs only available at exorbitant prices, if at all: “In an ideal world, I would recommend the parents to provide the child with nutritious food, rich with protein. I would advise that they maintain a hygienic environment for their children; I would stress the importance of clean water… In our situation… any recommendation you give … sometimes you feel like you are rubbing salt into these parents’ wounds.”
Dr. Maarouf described the relentless cycle of malnutrition stating that in some cases children were re-hospitalized after being discharged:
“We treated one little girl, aged six, for nutritional edema, she had severe protein deficiency when she came in early May; with the treatment we gave her she showed signs of improvement, including gaining weight, becoming livelier… unfortunately she was recently admitted again because her condition relapsed. Like most families in Gaza, her family is displaced; they live in a tent; they have to rely on the lentil or rice they get from the community kitchen. It’s a cycle. With no aid getting in, you feel like as a hospital you only patch up the wound but eventually it will burst again.”
Doctors have also warned that the lives of newborn babies are at risk amid acute shortages of baby formula milk, especially for children with lactose-intolerance or other allergies.
One doctor said: “There is a milk crisis in Gaza overall. Also, we notice that new mothers, because they themselves are not eating properly or because of the panic, trauma and anxiety, are unable to breastfeed. So, to secure baby formula at all is a struggle. But if your child has allergies, it’s almost impossible to find special formula in any of Gaza’s hospitals for infants the failure to secure special baby formula can be a death sentence.”
At Nasser hospital in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, Dr. Wafaa Abu Nimer confirmed the dire situation, reporting that by 30 June 2025, 9 children were still being treated for malnutrition-related complications at her facility alone. She described the scenes they have witnessed over the past two months as “really unprecedented” with severe cases of nutritional edema or marasmus, muscle wasting. She also said that some are additionally suffering from injuries due to explosions from which they have not recovered.
Dr. Abu Nimer said that since Israel’s new aid distribution scheme began there has been no signs of improvement in the situation with hundreds of children screened for malnutrition on a daily basis in their pediatric emergency room. Mass displacement orders issued to the Khan Younis governorate in May made Nasser hospital out of reach for thousands of displaced families.
Dr. Abu Nimer described to Amnesty how the impact on children extends beyond the physical. “One girl whose hair fell out almost completely as a result of nutritional edema, kept asking me ‘doctor, will my hair grow again? Am I [still] beautiful?’ Abu Nimer said. “Even if these children recover completely, the scars will always remain with them. Medically we know that malnutrition amongst infants and small children may have long-term cognitive and developmental effects, but I don’t think enough attention is being given to the mental health and psychological impact [of starvation and war] on children and parents.”
She also conveyed the exhaustion felt by medical staff: “We as doctors are also exhausted, we are malnourished ourselves, most of us are also displaced and live in tents, yet we do our best to offer medical care, provide nutrient supplements and as much support as we can. We try to save lives, we try to alleviate the suffering, but there is very little we can do after discharge.”
Weaponized aid
While Israeli authorities continue to impose their unlawful blockade on the entry of aid and commercial supplies into the occupied Gaza Strip, hundreds of aid trucks remain stuck outside Gaza, waiting for an Israeli permit to enter.
OCHA reported that as of 16 June 2025, 852 trucks for UN and international humanitarian organizations, the majority of which carry food supplies, remain stuck in Al-Arish in Egypt, yet to receive a permit from the Israeli authorities to enter Gaza. Moreover, the partial easing of the total siege on 19 May did not include easing restrictions on certain critical supplies, such as fuel and cooking gas, which have not been allowed into Gaza since 2 March. Without fuel, electricity cannot be produced to allow, for example, life-saving medical devices to function.
Only a trickle of the extremely limited aid allowed by Israel into Gaza reaches those in need. It is either distributed through the inhumane and deadly militarized scheme run by the GHF, or is offloaded by desperate starved civilians, and in some cases, organized gangs. This grim reality is compounded by Israel’s deliberate destruction of or denial of access to life-sustaining infrastructure, including some of Gaza’s most fertile agricultural land and food production sources, like greenhouses and poultry farms.
The World Food Programme and local organizations were for the first time permitted to distribute flour in Gaza City on 26 June 2025. The relatively smooth distribution that took place with thousands waiting their turn and no reported injuries is a damning indictment of Israel’s militarized GHF scheme. All the evidence gathered, including testimonies which Amnesty International is receiving from victims and witnesses, suggest that the GHF was designed so as to placate international concerns while constituting another tool of Israel’s genocide.
“Not only has the international community failed to stop this genocide, but it has also allowed Israel to constantly reinvent new ways to destroy Palestinian lives in Gaza and trample on their human dignity,” said Agnès Callamard.
“States must cease their inertia and live up to their legal obligations. They must exercise all necessary pressure to ensure Israel lifts immediately and unconditionally its awful blockade and ends the genocide in Gaza. They must end any form of contribution to Israel’s unlawful conduct or risk complicity in atrocity crimes. This requires immediately suspending all military support to Israel, banning trade and investment that contribute to Israel’s genocide or other grave violations of international law.
“States should also adopt targeted sanctions, through international and regional mechanisms, against those Israeli officials most implicated in international crimes and cooperate with the International Criminal Court, including by implementing its arrest warrants.”
Background
According to figures obtained from the Palestinian Ministry of Health, the under-five mortality rate for 2024 in Gaza was recorded at 32.7 deaths per 1,000 live births, representing a sharp increase compared to the 13.6 rate reported in 2022. Maternal mortality has also more than doubled from an estimated 19 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2022 to 43 deaths per 100,000 in 2024.
Canadian researchers recently investigated this idea in a sample of 1,082 undergraduate psychology students. The students completed a survey, which included questions about how they perceived their diet influenced their sleep and dreams.
Some 40% of participants reported certain foods impacted their sleep, with 25% of the whole sample claiming certain foods worsened their sleep, and 20% reporting certain foods improved their sleep.
Only 5.5% of respondents believed what they ate affected the nature of their dreams. But many of these people thought sweets or dairy products (such as cheese) made their dreams more strange or disturbing and worsened their sleep.
In contrast, participants reported fruits, vegetables and herbal teas led to better sleep.
This study used self-reporting, meaning the results rely on the participants recalling and reporting information about their sleep and dreams accurately. This could have affected the results.
It’s also possible participants were already familiar with the notion that cheese causes nightmares, especially given they were psychology students, many of whom may have studied sleep and dreaming.
This awareness could have made them more likely to notice or perceive their sleep was disrupted after eating dairy. In other words, the idea cheese leads to nightmares may have acted like a self-fulfilling prophecy and results may overestimate the actual likelihood of strange dreams.
Nonetheless, these findings show some people perceive a connection between what they eat and how they dream.
While there’s no evidence to prove cheese causes nightmares, there is evidence that does explain a link.
The science behind cheese and nightmares
Humans are diurnal creatures, meaning our body is primed to be asleep at night and awake during the day. Eating cheese before bed means we’re challenging the body with food at a time when it really doesn’t want to be eating.
At night, our physiological systems are not primed to digest food. For example, it takes longer for food to move through our digestive tract at night compared with during the day.
If we eat close to going to sleep, our body has to process and digest the food while we’re sleeping. This is a bit like running through mud – we can do it, but it’s slow and inefficient.
If your body is processing and digesting food instead of focusing all its resources on sleep, this can affect your shut-eye. Research has shown eating close to bedtime reduces our sleep quality, particularly our time spent in rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, which is the stage of sleep associated with vivid dreams.
People will have an even harder time digesting cheese at night if they’re lactose intolerant, which might mean they experience even greater impacts on their sleep. This follows what the Canadian researchers found in their study, with lactose intolerant participants reporting poorer sleep quality and more nightmares.
It’s important to note we might actually have vivid dreams or nightmares every night – what could change is whether we’re aware of the dreams and can remember them when we wake up.
Poor sleep quality often means we wake up more during the night. If we wake up during REM sleep, research shows we’re more likely to report vivid dreams or nightmares that we mightn’t even remember if we hadn’t woken up during them.
This is very relevant for the cheese and nightmares question. Put simply, eating before bed impacts our sleep quality, so we’re more likely to wake up during our nightmares and remember them.
Don’t panic – I’m not here to tell you to give up your cheesy evenings. But what we eat before bed can make a real difference to how well we sleep, so timing matters.
General sleep hygiene guidelines suggest avoiding meals at least two hours before bed. So even if you’re eating a very cheese-heavy meal, you have a window of time before bed to digest the meal and drift off to a nice peaceful sleep.
How about other dairy products?
Cheese isn’t the only dairy product which may influence our sleep. Most of us have heard about the benefits of having a warm glass of milk before bed.
Milk can be easier to digest than cheese. In fact, milk is a good choice in the evening, as it contains tryptophan, an amino acid that helps promote sleep.
Nonetheless, we still don’t want to be challenging our body with too much dairy before bed. Participants in the Canadian study did report nightmares after dairy, and milk close to bed might have contributed to this.
While it’s wise to steer clear of food (especially cheese) in the two hours before lights out, there’s no need to avoid cheese altogether. Enjoy that cheesy pasta or cheese board, just give your body time to digest before heading off to sleep. If you’re having a late night cheese craving, opt for something small. Your sleep (and your dreams) will thank you.
Charlotte Gupta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
European Commission Speech Brussels, 02 Jul 2025 Thank you very much.
I think what you see today and what you’re going to read is a very clear roadmap, or if you will, a clear expression of a European offer: how to make Europe the global leader in life sciences by 2030.
Because if you look at all the sectors of our economies, what you will find is that it is the biotech sector and the health sector where Europe has the biggest potential to become or to stay a leader.
If you look at the Draghi report, it is very clear that this is where Europe needs to up its game and where Europe has the basics to create itself as the hub for innovation and investment in long-term and sustainable healthcare. But for this to happen, we need to do a major overhaul of how we do things and also to use our assets even more strategically. Strategically meaning attracting science, attracting innovation, attracting investments and this way ensuring that our patients will always have the most state-of-the-art healthcare throughout the times to come.
But for this to happen, we need to do things urgently. Urgently because there is a very clear global race for this. If I want to put it into three major challenges, what we need to achieve is first of all we have a trade challenge.
This is the sector which is the second biggest exporter from the EU. This is a sector which is contributing very largely to the trade surplus that we are having. And this is the sector which is truly global, and this is the sector which is still leading globally.
The second challenge is the challenge of investments. How do we create a climate in which we have long-term vision ensured for everyone to invest into these new technologies. New technologies are around the corner we all know and in the healthcare sector this might come even faster than anywhere else.
We have new therapies emerging by the day. We have completely new combinations of innovations that we have not seen before based on artificial intelligence, European health data space just to name two of the main cornerstones. But for this to be turned into real economic output and also patient outcomes, we need to do an overhaul of the European legislative framework.
And this is what we have sketched out in a broad term in this paper today. Some of the elements are already on the way.
The pharma review is already very well advanced. We hope that this will be concluded already this year. And this should already give a very clear and strong signal to the innovators that we want them to stay. And not only that but we want them to invest more because the ground for innovation has been reinforced.
The second is of course the very important Critical Medicines Act which should act to create the markets on the ground for all innovative products, but which should also create the accessibility for the patients to all these new technologies. And of course, when it comes to talking about the rest of this year, the most important elements we anticipate to come forward with is going to be first of all a full review of the medical devices sector, a Biotech Act and also that should include a revision of the Clinical Trials Regulation.
And to bring all these innovations into therapies, a very comprehensive European cardiovascular health plan. We do hope that we can achieve all this still this year, and we can put it on the table of the co-legislators because we have no time to lose. So, let’s go one by one.
The medical devices. The medical devices is an area maybe overlooked by many, but the medical devices area is a backbone of our healthcare system. And it has a huge potential for the development of the healthcare system because we are living in the age when innovators are combining different products that have not been seen before.
Ozempic is the talk of the town. Ozempic is a pharmaceutical product, but it is marketed together with a medical device. And for this to be authorised it had to be done twice.
It had to be authorised as a pharmaceutical product, and it had to be authorised as a medical device. Of course, we do not want to compromise on health and safety. We don’t want to compromise on efficacy.
But we have to make sure that, when we will have medical devices that are also using artificial intelligence, we will be the first and the fastest to authorise them. And we will be the place that these are going to be developed and innovated. So, we need a major overhaul for this sector which is mainly composed of SMEs so that they can really unravel the whole new avenue of medtech innovation.
This should come still this year. Second big proposal we are trying to make is going to be the Biotech Act. If you ask me, if I want to translate it into everyday language, the Biotech Act should serve two things.
One is to break the boundaries of innovation. So far we have silos. We have the pharmaceutical sector, we have the medical devices sector, we have the chemical sector, and I can go on with all the interlinked sectors.
But our goal here is to make innovation easier. And when you have a genuine idea which crosscuts the different sectors that we have you should be able to go much faster and you should be able to go much easier into creating new products in Europe and hopefully manufacturing them also in Europe. But for this to happen, we also need to look into the other field of major international competition which is the clinical trials.
It is clear that we are challenged in Europe on two main fronts. One is the clinical trials; the other one is the basic life science research where we are losing ground. We are losing ground to competitors like the US and China.
And Europe has been at the forefront of all this 10 years ago. So, we need to really change our mindset and this starts with a full review of the clinical trials and how to make it more effective and also faster. Also, by using new technologies because there are ways in which we can speed up things by using simply the new technologies.
We need the therapies to enter the markets much faster and we need also innovation to be translated into patient outcomes much much faster. So, as you know we are now at the stage of consulting the public about the Biotech Act and, if it is up to me, I still want to deliver this this year because again we have no time to lose.
And finally, on the cardiovascular health plan, this should be the vehicle that brings these new therapies to the patients. Cardiovascular health, I think, is the biggest challenge of Europe currently. We have a comprehensive plan already for cancer but still the single biggest cause of death in Europe is the cardiovascular diseases. And unfortunately, the situation is not improving but actually deteriorating.
If you look at only the figure related to the young generation, what you see is that the young generation, meaning the under 30s, 40% of them are either obese or having diabetes or both. That means that, 10 years from now, we will have a generation with a condition. A whole generation in the prime of their life having a condition, most probably cardiovascular condition.
We have to act now, and we have to make it much easier and much faster for them to access new therapies that are personalized, that are also based on predictive medicine, that are changing the realities, and which are creating real personal choices that people can make.
I think if you look at our little paper you will see a vision, but I want to translate this very fast into action as well.
Thank you, I am now happy to answer your questions.
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Peter M Macharia, Senior postdoctoral research fellow, Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp
The lack of reliable information about health facilities across sub-Saharan Africa became very clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. Amid a surge in emergency care needs, information was lacking about the location of facilities, bed capacity and oxygen availability, and even where to find medical specialists. This data could have enabled precise assessments of hospital surge capacity and geographic access to critical care. Peter Macharia and Emelda Okiro, whose research focuses on public health and equity of health service access in low resource settings, share the findings of their recent study, co-authored with colleagues.
What are open health facility databases?
A health facility is a service delivery point where healthcare services are provided. The facilities can range from small clinics and doctor’s offices to large teaching and referral hospitals.
A health facility database is a list of all health facilities in a country or geographic area, such as a district. A typical database should assign each health facility a unique code, name, size, type (from primary to tertiary), ownership (public or private), operational status (working or closed), location and subnational unit (county or district). It should also record services (emergency obstetric care, for example), capacity (number of beds, for example), infrastructure (electricity availability, for example), contact information (address and email), and when this information was last updated.
The ideal method of compiling this list is to conduct a census, as Kenya did in 2023. But this takes resources. Some countries have compiled lists from existing incomplete ones. Senegal did this and so did Kenya in 2003 and 2008.
This list should be open to stakeholders, including government agencies, development partners and researchers. Health facility lists must be shared through a governance framework that balances data sharing with protections for data subjects and creators. In some countries, such as Kenya and Malawi, these listings are accessible through web portals without additional permission. In others, such facility lists do not exist or require extra permission.
Why are they useful to have?
Facility listings can serve the needs of individuals and communities. They also serve sub-national, national and continental health objectives.
At the individual level, a facility list offers a choice of alternatives to health seekers. At the community level, the data can guide decisions like where to place community health workers, as seen in Mali and Sierra Leone.
Health lists are useful when distributing commodities such as bed nets and allocating resources based on the health needs of the areas they serve. They help in planning for vaccination campaigns by creating detailed immunisation microplans.
By taking account of the disease burden, social dynamics and environmental factors, health services can be tailored to specific needs.
Detailed maps of healthcare resources enable quicker emergency responses by pinpointing facilities equipped for specific crises. Disease surveillance systems depend on continuously collecting data from healthcare facilities.
At the continental level, lists are crucial for a coordinated health system response during pandemics and outbreaks. They can facilitate cross-border planning, pandemic preparedness and collaboration.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, these lists informed where to put additional resources such as makeshift hospitals or transport programmes for adults over 60 years of age.
The lists are used to identify vulnerable populations at risk of emerging pathogens and populations that can benefit from new health facilities.
Many problems arise if we don’t know where health facilities are or what they offer. Healthcare planning becomes inefficient. This can result in duplicate facility lists and the misallocation of resources, which leads to waste and inequities.
We can’t identify populations that lack services. Emergency responses weaken due to uncertainty about where best to move patients with specific conditions.
Resources are wasted when there are duplicate facility lists. For example, between 2010 and 2016, six government departments partnered with development organisations, resulting in ten lists of health facilities in Nigeria.
In Tanzania, over 10 different health facility lists existed in 2009. Maintained by donors and government agencies, the function-specific lists didn’t work together to share information easily and accurately. This prompted the need for a national master facility list.
What needs to happen to build one?
A comprehensive list of health facilities can be compiled through mapping exercises or from existing lists. The health ministry should take responsibility for setting up, developing and updating this list.
Partnerships are crucial for developing facility lists. Stakeholders include donors, implementing and humanitarian partners, technical advisors and research institutions. Many of these have their own project-based lists, which should integrate into a centralised facility list managed by the ministry. The health ministry must foster a transparent environment, encouraging citizens and stakeholders to contribute to enhancing health facility data.
Political and financial commitment from governments is essential. Creating and maintaining a proper list requires significant investment. Expertise and resources are necessary to keep it updated.
A commitment to open data is a necessary step. Open access to these lists makes them more complete, reliable and useful.
Peter Macharia is funded by Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- Belgium (FWO, number 1201925N) for his Senior Postdoctoral Fellowship.
Emelda Okiro receives funding for her research from the Wellcome Trust through a Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (#224272).
The global ecosystem of climate finance is complex, constantly changing and sometimes hard to understand. But understanding it is critical to demanding a green transition that’s just and fair. That’s why The Conversation has collaborated with climate finance experts to create this user-friendly guide, in partnership with Vogue Business. With definitions and short videos, we’ll add to this glossary as new terms emerge.
Blue bonds
Blue bonds are debt instruments designed to finance ocean-related conservation, like protecting coral reefs or sustainable fishing. They’re modelled after green bonds but focus specifically on the health of marine ecosystems – this is a key pillar of climate stability.
By investing in blue bonds, governments and private investors can fund marine projects that deliver both environmental benefits and long-term financial returns. Seychelles issued the first blue bond in 2018. Now, more are emerging as ocean conservation becomes a greater priority for global sustainability efforts.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon border adjustment mechanism
Did you know that imported steel could soon face a carbon tax at the EU border? That’s because the carbon border adjustment mechanism is about to shake up the way we trade, produce and price carbon.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is a proposed EU policy to put a carbon price on imports like iron, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity. If a product is made in a country with weaker climate policies, the importer must pay the difference between that country’s carbon price and the EU’s. The goal is to avoid “carbon leakage” – when companies relocate to avoid emissions rules and to ensure fair competition on climate action.
But this mechanism is more than just a tariff tool. It’s a bold attempt to reshape global trade. Countries exporting to the EU may be pushed to adopt greener manufacturing or face higher tariffs.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is controversial: some call it climate protectionism, others argue it could incentivise low-carbon innovation worldwide and be vital for achieving climate justice. Many developing nations worry it could penalise them unfairly unless there’s climate finance to support greener transitions.
Carbon border adjustment mechanism is still evolving, but it’s already forcing companies, investors and governments to rethink emissions accounting, supply chains and competitiveness. It’s a carbon price with global consequences.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon budget
The Paris agreement aims to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2030. The carbon budget is the maximum amount of CO₂ emissions allowed, if we want a 67% chance of staying within this limit. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that the remaining carbon budgets amount to 400 billion tonnes of CO₂ from 2020 onwards.
Think of the carbon budget as a climate allowance. Once it has been spent, the risk of extreme weather or sea level rise increases sharply. If emissions continue unchecked, the budget will be exhausted within years, risking severe climate consequences. The IPCC sets the global carbon budget based on climate science, and governments use this framework to set national emission targets, climate policies and pathways to net zero emissions.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Carbon credits
Carbon credits are like a permit that allow companies to release a certain amount of carbon into the air. One credit usually equals one tonne of CO₂. These credits are issued by the local government or another authorised body and can be bought and sold. Think of it like a budget allowance for pollution. It encourages cuts in carbon emissions each year to stay within those global climate targets.
The aim is to put a price on carbon to encourage cuts in emissions. If a company reduces its emissions and has leftover credits, it can sell them to another company that is going over its limit. But there are issues. Some argue that carbon credit schemes allow polluters to pay their way out of real change, and not all credits are from trustworthy projects. Although carbon credits can play a role in addressing the climate crisis, they are not a solution on their own.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon credits explained.
Carbon offsetting
Carbon offsetting is a way for people or organisations to make up for the carbon emissions they are responsible for. For example, if you contribute to emissions by flying, driving or making goods, you can help balance that out by supporting projects that reduce emissions elsewhere. This might include planting trees (which absorb carbon dioxide) or building wind farms to produce renewable energy.
The idea is that your support helps cancel out the damage you are doing. For example, if your flight creates one tonne of carbon dioxide, you pay to support a project that removes the same amount.
While this sounds like a win-win, carbon offsetting is not perfect. Some argue that it lets people feel better without really changing their behaviour, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as greenwashing.
Not all projects are effective or well managed. For instance, some tree planting initiatives might have taken place anyway, even without the offset funding, deeming your contribution inconsequential. Others might plant the non-native trees in areas where they are unlikely to reach their potential in terms of absorbing carbon emissions.
So, offsetting can help, but it is no magic fix. It works best alongside real efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage low-carbon lifestyles or supply chains.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon offsetting explained.
Carbon tax
A carbon tax is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by placing a direct price on CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.
A carbon tax is grounded in the concept of the social cost of carbon. This is an estimate of the economic damage caused by emitting one tonne of CO₂, including climate-related health, infrastructure and ecosystem impacts.
A carbon tax is typically levied per tonne of CO₂ emitted. The tax can be applied either upstream (on fossil fuel producers) or downstream (on consumers or power generators). This makes carbon-intensive activities more expensive, it incentivises nations, businesses and people to reduce their emissions, while untaxed renewable energy becomes more competitively priced and appealing.
Carbon tax was first introduced by Finland in 1990. Since then, more than 39 jurisdictions have implemented similar schemes. According to the World Bank, carbon pricing mechanisms (that’s both carbon taxes and emissions trading systems) now cover about 24% of global emissions. The remaining 76% are not priced, mainly due to limited coverage in both sectors and geographical areas, plus persistent fossil fuel subsidies. Expanding coverage would require extending carbon pricing to sectors like agriculture and transport, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and strengthening international governance.
What is carbon tax?
Sweden has one of the world’s highest carbon tax rates and has cut emissions by 33% since 1990 while maintaining economic growth. The policy worked because Sweden started early, applied the tax across many industries and maintained clear, consistent communication that kept the public on board.
Canada introduced a national carbon tax in 2019. In Canada, most of the revenue from carbon taxes is returned directly to households through annual rebates, making the scheme revenue-neutral for most families. However, despite its economic logic, inflation and rising fuel prices led to public discontent – especially as many citizens were unaware they were receiving rebates.
Carbon taxes face challenges including political resistance, fairness concerns and low public awareness. Their success depends on clear communication and visible reinvestment of revenues into climate or social goals. A 2025 study that surveyed 40,000 people in 20 countries found that support for carbon taxes increases significantly when revenues are used for environmental infrastructure, rather than returned through tax rebates.
By Meilan Yan, associate professor and senior lecturer in financial economics, Loughborough University
Climate resilience
Floods, wildfires, heatwaves and rising seas are pushing our cities, towns and neighbourhoods to their limits. But there’s a powerful idea that’s helping cities fight back: climate resilience.
Resilience refers to the ability of a system, such as a city, a community or even an ecosystem – to anticipate, prepare for, respond to and recover from climate-related shocks and stresses.
Sometimes people say resilience is about bouncing back. But it’s not just about surviving the next storm. It’s about adapting, evolving and thriving in a changing world.
Resilience means building smarter and better. It means designing homes that stay cool during heatwaves. Roads that don’t wash away in floods. Power grids that don’t fail when the weather turns extreme.
It’s also about people. A truly resilient city protects its most vulnerable. It ensures that everyone – regardless of income, age or background – can weather the storm.
And resilience isn’t just reactive. It’s about using science, local knowledge and innovation to reduce a risk before disaster strikes. From restoring wetlands to cool cities and absorb floods, to creating early warning systems for heatwaves, climate resilience is about weaving strength into the very fabric of our cities.
By Paul O’Hare, senior lecturer in geography and development, Manchester Metropolitan University
The meaning of climate resilience.
Climate risk disclosure
Climate risk disclosure refers to how companies report the risks they face from climate change, such as flood damage, supply chain disruptions or regulatory costs. It includes both physical risks (like storms) and transition risks (like changing laws or consumer preferences).
Mandatory disclosures, such as those proposed by the UK and EU, aim to make climate-related risks transparent to investors. Done well, these reports can shape capital flows toward more sustainable business models. Done poorly, they become greenwashing tools.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Emissions trading scheme
An emissions trading scheme is the primary market-based approach for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in many countries, including Australia, Canada, China and Mexico.
Part of a government’s job is to decide how much of the economy’s carbon emissions it wants to avoid in order to fight climate change. It must put a cap on carbon emissions that economic production is not allowed to surpass. Preferably, the polluters (that’s the manufacturers, fossil fuel companies) should be the ones paying for the cost of climate mitigation.
Regulators could simply tell all the firms how much they are allowed to emit over the next ten years or so. But giving every firm the same allowance across the board is not cost efficient, because avoiding carbon emissions is much harder for some firms (such as steel producers) than others (such as tax consultants). Since governments cannot know each firm’s specific cost profile either, it can’t customise the allowances. Also, monitoring whether polluters actually abide by their assigned limits is extremely costly.
An emissions trading scheme cleverly solves this dilemma using the cap-and-trade mechanism. Instead of assigning each polluter a fixed quota and risking inefficiencies, the government issues a large number of tradable permits – each worth, say, a tonne of CO₂-equivalent (CO₂e) – that sum up to the cap. Firms that can cut greenhouse gas emissions relatively cheaply can then trade their surplus permits to those who find it harder – at a price that makes both better off.
By Mathias Weidinger, environmental economist, University of Oxford
Emissions trading schemes, explained by climate finance expert Mathias Weidinger.
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing
ESG investing stands for environmental, social and governance investing. In simple terms, these are a set of standards that investors use to screen a company’s potential investments.
ESG means choosing to invest in companies that are not only profitable but also responsible. Investors use ESG metrics to assess risks (such as climate liability, labour practices) and align portfolios with sustainability goals by looking at how a company affects our planet and treats its people and communities. While there isn’t one single global body governing ESG, various organisations, ratings agencies and governments all contribute to setting and evolving these metrics.
For example, investing in a company committed to renewable energy and fair labour practices might be considered “ESG aligned”. Supporters believe ESG helps identify risks and create long-term value. Critics argue it can be vague or used for greenwashing, where companies appear sustainable without real action. ESG works best when paired with transparency and clear data. A barrier is that standards vary, and it’s not always clear what counts as ESG.
Why do financial companies and institutions care? Issues like climate change and nature loss pose significant risks, affecting company values and the global economy.
However, gathering reliable ESG information can be difficult. Companies often self-report, and the data isn’t always standardised or up to date. Researchers – including my team at the University of Oxford – are using geospatial data, like satellite imagery and artificial intelligence, to develop global databases for high-impact industries, across all major sectors and geographies, and independently assess environmental and social risks and impacts.
For instance, we can analyse satellite images of a facility over time to monitor its emissions effect on nature and biodiversity, or assess deforestation linked to a company’s supply chain. This allows us to map supply chains, identify high-impact assets, and detect hidden risks and opportunities in key industries, providing an objective, real-time look at their environmental footprint.
The goal is for this to improve ESG ratings and provide clearer, more consistent insights for investors. This approach could help us overcome current data limitations to build a more sustainable financial future.
By Amani Maalouf, senior researcher in spatial finance, University of Oxford
Environmental, social and governance investing explained.
Financed emissions
Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions linked to a bank’s or investor’s lending and investment portfolio, rather than their own operations. For example, a bank that funds a coal mine or invests in fossil fuels is indirectly responsible for the carbon those activities produce.
Measuring financed emissions helps reveal the real climate impact of financial institutions not just their office energy use. It’s a cornerstone of climate accountability in finance and is becoming essential under net zero pledges.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Green bonds
Green bonds are loans issued to fund environmentally beneficial projects, such as energy-efficient buildings or clean transportation. Investors choose them to support climate solutions while earning returns.
Green bonds are a major tool to finance the shift to a low-carbon economy by directing finance toward climate solutions. As climate costs rise, green bonds could help close the funding gap while ensuring transparency and accountability.
Green bonds are required to ensure funds are spent as promised. For instance, imagine a city wants to upgrade its public transportation by adding electric buses to reduce pollution. Instead of raising taxes or slashing other budgets, the city can issue green bonds to raise the necessary capital. Investors buy the bonds, the city gets the funding, and the environment benefits from cleaner air and fewer emissions.
The growing participation of government issuers has improved the transparency and reliability of these investments. The green bond market has grown rapidly in recent years. According to the Bank for International Settlements, the green bond market reached US$2.9 trillion (£2.1 trillion) in 2024 – nearly six times larger than in 2018. At the same time, annual issuance (the total value of green bonds issued in a year) hit US$700 billion, highlighting the increasing role of green finance in tackling climate change.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Just transition
Just transition is the process of moving to a low-carbon society that is environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. In a broad sense, a just transition means focusing on creating a more fair and equal society.
Just transition has existed as a concept since the 1970s. It was originally applied to the green energy transition, protecting workers in the fossil fuel industry as we move towards more sustainable alternatives.
These days, it has so many overlapping issues of justice hidden within it, so the concept is hard to define. Even at the level of UN climate negotiations, global leaders struggle to agree on what a just transition means.
The big battle is between developed countries, who want a very restrictive definition around jobs and skills, and developing countries, who are looking for a much more holistic approach that considers wider system change and includes considerations around human rights, Indigenous people and creating an overall fairer global society.
A just transition is essentially about imagining a future where we have moved beyond fossil fuels and society works better for everyone – but that can look very different in a European city compared to a rural setting in south-east Asia.
For example, in a British city it might mean fewer cars and better public transport. In a rural setting, it might mean new ways of growing crops that are more sustainable, and building homes that are heatwave resistant.
By Alix Dietzel, climate justice and climate policy expert, University of Bristol
The meaning of just transition.
Loss and damage
A global loss and damage fund was agreed by nations at the UN climate summit (Cop27) in 2022. This means that the rich countries of the world put money into a fund that the least developed countries can then call upon when they have a climate emergency.
At the moment, the loss and damage fund is made up of relatively small pots of money. Much more will be needed to provide relief to those who need it most now and in the future.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains loss and damage.
Mitigation v adaptation
Mitigation means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change. Adaptation means adjusting to its effects, like building sea walls or growing heat-resistant crops. Both are essential: mitigation tackles the cause, while adaptation tackles the symptoms.
Globally, most funding goes to mitigation, but vulnerable communities often need adaptation support most. Balancing the two is a major challenge in climate policy, especially for developing countries facing immediate climate threats.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Nationally determined contributions
Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are at the heart of the Paris agreement, the global effort to collectively combat climate change. NDCs are individual climate action plans created by each country. These targets and strategies outline how a country will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change.
Each nation sets its own goals based on its own circumstances and capabilities – there’s no standard NDC. These plans should be updated every five years and countries are encouraged to gradually increase their climate ambitions over time.
The aim is for NDCs to drive real action by guiding policies, attracting investment and inspiring innovation in clean technologies. But current NDCs fall short of the Paris agreement goals and many countries struggle to turn their plans into a reality. NDCs also vary widely in scope and detail so it’s hard to compare efforts across the board. Stronger international collaboration and greater accountability will be crucial.
By Doug Specht, reader in cultural geography and communication, University of Westminster
Fashion depends on water, soil and biodiversity – all natural capital. And forward-thinking designers are now asking: how do we create rather than deplete, how do we restore rather than extract?
Natural capital is the value assigned to the stock of forests, soils, oceans and even minerals such as lithium. It sustains every part of our economy. It’s the bees that pollinate our crops. It’s the wetlands that filter our water and it’s the trees that store carbon and cool our cities.
If we fail to value nature properly, we risk losing it. But if we succeed, we unlock a future that is not only sustainable but also truly regenerative.
My team at the University of Oxford is developing tools to integrate nature into national balance sheets, advising governments on biodiversity, and we’re helping industries from fashion to finance embed nature into their decision making.
Natural capital, explained by a climate finance expert.
By Mette Morsing, professor of business sustainability and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford
Net zero
Reaching net zero means reducing the amount of additional greenhouse gas emissions that accumulate in the atmosphere to zero. This concept was popularised by the Paris agreement, a landmark deal that was agreed at the UN climate summit (Cop21) in 2015 to limit the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
There are some emissions, from farming and aviation for example, that will be very difficult, if not impossible, to reach absolute zero. Hence, the “net”. This allows people, businesses and countries to find ways to suck greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere, effectively cancelling out emissions while trying to reduce them. This can include reforestation, rewilding, direct air capture and carbon capture and storage. The goal is to reach net zero: the point at which no extra greenhouse gases accumulate in Earth’s atmosphere.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains net zero.
For more expert explainer videos, visit The Conversation’s quick climate dictionary playlist here on YouTube.
Mark Maslin is Pro-Vice Provost of the UCL Climate Crisis Grand Challenge and Founding Director of the UCL Centre for Sustainable Aviation. He was co-director of the London NERC Doctoral Training Partnership and is a member of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. He is an advisor to Sheep Included Ltd, Lansons, NetZeroNow and has advised the UK Parliament. He has received grant funding from the NERC, EPSRC, ESRC, DFG, Royal Society, DIFD, BEIS, DECC, FCO, Innovate UK, Carbon Trust, UK Space Agency, European Space Agency, Research England, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust, CIFF, Sprint2020, and British Council. He has received funding from the BBC, Lancet, Laithwaites, Seventh Generation, Channel 4, JLT Re, WWF, Hermes, CAFOD, HP and Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
Amani Maalouf receives funding from IKEA Foundation and UK Research and Innovation (NE/V017756/1).
Narmin Nahidi is affiliated with several academic associations, including the Financial Management Association (FMA), British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA), American Finance Association (AFA), and the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CMBE). These affiliations do not influence the content of this article.
Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.
Alix Dietzel, Dongna Zhang, Doug Specht, Mathias Weidinger, Meilan Yan, and Sankar Sivarajah do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
On June 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 ruling that preserves free preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, a popular benefit that helps approximately 150 million Americans stay healthy.
The case, Kennedy v. Braidwood, was the fourth major legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. The decision, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh with the support of Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that insurers must continue to cover at no cost any preventive care approved by a federal panel called the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Members of the task force are independent scientific experts, appointed for four-year terms. The panel’s role had been purely advisory until the ACA, and the plaintiffs contended that the members lacked the appropriate authority as they had not been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, saying that members simply needed to be appointed by the Health and Human Services Secretary – currently, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – which they had been, under his predecessor during the Biden administration.
This ruling seemingly safeguards access to preventive care. But as public health researchers who study health insurance and sexual health, we see another concern: It leaves preventive care vulnerable to how Kennedy and future HHS secretaries will choose to exercise their power over the task force and its recommendations.
What is the US Preventive Services Task Force?
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was initially created in 1984 to develop recommendations about prevention for primary care doctors. It is modeled after the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, which was established in 1976.
Under the ACA, insurers must fully cover all screenings and interventions endorsed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images
The task force makes new recommendations and updates existing ones by reviewing clinical and policy evidence on a regular basis and weighing the potential benefits and risks of a wide range of health screenings and interventions. These include mammograms; blood pressure, colon cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis screenings; and HIV prevention. Over 150 million Americans have benefited from free coverage of these recommended services under the ACA, and around 60% of privately insured people use at least one of the covered services each year.
The task force plays such a crucial role in health care because it is one of three federal groups whose recommendations insurers must abide by. Section 2713 of the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to offer full coverage of preventive services endorsed by three federal groups: the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. For example, the coronavirus relief bill, which passed in March 2020 and allocated emergency funding in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, used this provision to ensure COVID-19 vaccines would be free for many Americans.
The Braidwood case and HIV prevention
This case, originally filed in Texas in 2020, was brought by Braidwood Management, a Christian for-profit corporation owned by Steven Hotze, a Texas physician and Republican activist who has previously filed multiple lawsuits against the ACA. Braidwood and its co-plaintiffs argued on religious grounds against being forced to offer preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, a medicine that prevents HIV infection, in their insurance plans.
At issue in Braidwood was whether task force members – providers and researchers who provide independent and nonpartisan expertise – were appropriately appointed and supervised under the appointments clause of the Constitution, which specifies how various government positions are appointed. The case called into question free coverage of all recommendations made by the task force since the Affordable Care Act was passed in March 2010.
In the ruling, Kavanaugh wrote that “the Task Force members’ appointments are fully consistent with the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.” In laying out his reasoning, he wrote, “The Task Force members were appointed by and are supervised and directed by the Secretary of HHS. And the Secretary of HHS, in turn, answers to the President of the United States.”
Concerns over political influence
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is meant to operate independently of political influence, and its decisions are technically not directly reviewable. However, the task force is appointed by the HHS secretary, who may remove any of its members at any time for any reason, even if such actions are highly unusual.
Kennedy recently took the unprecedented step of removing all members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which debates vaccine safety but also, crucially, helps decide what immunizations are free to Americans guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. The newly constituted committee, appointed in weeks rather than years, includes several vaccine skeptics and has already moved to rescind some vaccine recommendations, such as routine COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women and children.
Kennedy has also proposed restructuring out of existence the agency that supports the task force, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. That agency has been subject to massive layoffs within the Department of Health and Human Services. For full disclosure, one of the authors is currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and previously worked there.
The decision to safeguard the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force as a body and, by extension, free preventive care under the ACA, doesn’t come without risks and highlights the fragility of long-standing, independent advisory systems in the face of the politicization of health. Kennedy could simply remove the existing task force members and replace them with members who may reshape the types of care recommended to Americans by their doctors and insurance plans based on debunked science and misinformation.
Partisanship and the politicization of health threaten trust in evidence. Already, signs are emerging that Americans on both side of the political divide are losing confidence in government health agencies. This ruling preserves a crucial part of the Affordable Care Act, yet federal health guidelines and access to lifesaving care could still swing dramatically in Kennedy’s hands – or with each subsequent transition of power.
Paul Shafer receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Department of Veterans Affairs. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.
Kristefer Stojanovski receives funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.
On June 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 ruling that preserves free preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, a popular benefit that helps approximately 150 million Americans stay healthy.
The case, Kennedy v. Braidwood, was the fourth major legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. The decision, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh with the support of Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that insurers must continue to cover at no cost any preventive care approved by a federal panel called the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Members of the task force are independent scientific experts, appointed for four-year terms. The panel’s role had been purely advisory until the ACA, and the plaintiffs contended that the members lacked the appropriate authority as they had not been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, saying that members simply needed to be appointed by the Health and Human Services Secretary – currently, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – which they had been, under his predecessor during the Biden administration.
This ruling seemingly safeguards access to preventive care. But as public health researchers who study health insurance and sexual health, we see another concern: It leaves preventive care vulnerable to how Kennedy and future HHS secretaries will choose to exercise their power over the task force and its recommendations.
What is the US Preventive Services Task Force?
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was initially created in 1984 to develop recommendations about prevention for primary care doctors. It is modeled after the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, which was established in 1976.
Under the ACA, insurers must fully cover all screenings and interventions endorsed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images
The task force makes new recommendations and updates existing ones by reviewing clinical and policy evidence on a regular basis and weighing the potential benefits and risks of a wide range of health screenings and interventions. These include mammograms; blood pressure, colon cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis screenings; and HIV prevention. Over 150 million Americans have benefited from free coverage of these recommended services under the ACA, and around 60% of privately insured people use at least one of the covered services each year.
The task force plays such a crucial role in health care because it is one of three federal groups whose recommendations insurers must abide by. Section 2713 of the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to offer full coverage of preventive services endorsed by three federal groups: the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. For example, the coronavirus relief bill, which passed in March 2020 and allocated emergency funding in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, used this provision to ensure COVID-19 vaccines would be free for many Americans.
The Braidwood case and HIV prevention
This case, originally filed in Texas in 2020, was brought by Braidwood Management, a Christian for-profit corporation owned by Steven Hotze, a Texas physician and Republican activist who has previously filed multiple lawsuits against the ACA. Braidwood and its co-plaintiffs argued on religious grounds against being forced to offer preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, a medicine that prevents HIV infection, in their insurance plans.
At issue in Braidwood was whether task force members – providers and researchers who provide independent and nonpartisan expertise – were appropriately appointed and supervised under the appointments clause of the Constitution, which specifies how various government positions are appointed. The case called into question free coverage of all recommendations made by the task force since the Affordable Care Act was passed in March 2010.
In the ruling, Kavanaugh wrote that “the Task Force members’ appointments are fully consistent with the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution.” In laying out his reasoning, he wrote, “The Task Force members were appointed by and are supervised and directed by the Secretary of HHS. And the Secretary of HHS, in turn, answers to the President of the United States.”
Concerns over political influence
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is meant to operate independently of political influence, and its decisions are technically not directly reviewable. However, the task force is appointed by the HHS secretary, who may remove any of its members at any time for any reason, even if such actions are highly unusual.
Kennedy recently took the unprecedented step of removing all members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which debates vaccine safety but also, crucially, helps decide what immunizations are free to Americans guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. The newly constituted committee, appointed in weeks rather than years, includes several vaccine skeptics and has already moved to rescind some vaccine recommendations, such as routine COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women and children.
Kennedy has also proposed restructuring out of existence the agency that supports the task force, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. That agency has been subject to massive layoffs within the Department of Health and Human Services. For full disclosure, one of the authors is currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and previously worked there.
The decision to safeguard the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force as a body and, by extension, free preventive care under the ACA, doesn’t come without risks and highlights the fragility of long-standing, independent advisory systems in the face of the politicization of health. Kennedy could simply remove the existing task force members and replace them with members who may reshape the types of care recommended to Americans by their doctors and insurance plans based on debunked science and misinformation.
Partisanship and the politicization of health threaten trust in evidence. Already, signs are emerging that Americans on both side of the political divide are losing confidence in government health agencies. This ruling preserves a crucial part of the Affordable Care Act, yet federal health guidelines and access to lifesaving care could still swing dramatically in Kennedy’s hands – or with each subsequent transition of power.
Paul Shafer receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Department of Veterans Affairs. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.
Kristefer Stojanovski receives funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of these agencies or the United States government.
.jpg){kind=link}
